Less
than
two
months
after
commercially
launching
Protégé
General
AI,
LexisNexis
is
back
with
a
next-generation
update.
The
company
unveiled
a
significant
expansion
today,
unifying
LexisNexis
content,
customer
documents,
and
open
web
insights
under
one
roof,
with
Shepard’s
Citations
along
for
the
ride
like
the
chaperone
at
prom.
As
we
highlighted
from
the
company’s
ILTACON
preview,
LexisNexis
places
a
lot
of
its
effort
in
model
evaluation.
With
an
ever-expanding
array
of
language
models
out
there,
the
legal
research
giant
has
become
a
de
facto
AI
consultant,
weighing
the
competing
models
out
there
to
make
sure
users
get
the
best
tool
for
their
task.
The
new
“Best
Fit”
mode
elevates
this
trend,
turning
the
system
itself
into
a
traffic
cop,
selecting
the
optimal
AI
model
for
a
given
user
request.
Like
any
good
science
fiction
story,
users
can
opt
for
the
manual
override
and
pick
their
own
from
the
models
on
offer.
But
midlevel
associates
aren’t
AI
sommelier-priests
spending
their
off
hours
swirling
Anthropic
vs.
OpenAI
vintages.
The
engineers
at
LexisNexis
have
spent
more
time
on
this.
Since
the
only
products
proliferating
faster
than
AI
models
are
the
legal
tools
promising
to
deliver
those
models,
user
experience
becomes
the
great
differentiator.
How
does
a
product
keep
lawyers
glued
on
its
screen
for
their
AI
needs?
And
it’s
not
just
about
outcompeting
legal
tech
rivals.
No
one
wants
to
put
it
this
bluntly,
but
we’re
one
frustrated
partner
email
away
from
some
junior
dropping
a
PDF
full
of
client
secrets
into
ChatGPT
at
2
a.m.
Warding
lawyers
off
the
consumer-facing
tools
requires
a
secure
alternative
that
doesn’t
feel
like
punishment.
When
LexisNexis
created
a
General
AI
option
—
within
their
platform
—
to
give
users
a
ChatGPT
experience
without
inadvertently
handing
over
confidential
information,
they
took
a
big
step
toward
owning
eyeballs.
“Legal
professionals
want
one
trusted
legal
AI
workflow
solution,”
said
Sean
Fitzpatrick,
CEO
of
LexisNexis
North
America,
UK,
and
Ireland.
While
performance
still
matters,
the
enduring
legacy
of
Steve
Jobs
is
that
it
helps
a
lot
to
build
a
product
people
actually
like
using.
According
to
the
press
release,
this
next
generation
product
will
also
test
counterpoints,
explore
alternative
approaches,
and
deliver
a
second
“opinion”
on
arguments.
On
the
one
hand,
anything
that
keeps
lawyers
from
practicing
their
arguments
with
their
spouses
can
only
help
avoid
embarrassing
moments
with
the
judge.
And
despite
the
tech
industry
narrative
that
AI
is
a
magic
box
that
can
replace
all
labor,
its
most
consistently
valuable
use
remains
as
a
sounding
board
and
assistant
—
once
you
successfully
convince
it
to
stop
telling
you
that
every
idea
you
have
is
amazing.
Tools
only
work
when
people
use
them
correctly,
and
we’ve
seen
how
well
that’s
been
going
for
lawyers
and
AI.
Pitching
the
product
as
an
a
sparring
partner
in
the
drafting
process
helps
appropriately
shape
expectations.
Time
will
tell
if
attorneys
figure
out
how
to
navigate
a
world
of
instantaneous
feedback.
We’ve
written
before
about
the
dromological
displacement
where
the
speed
provided
by
the
technology
changes
the
nature
of
the
work
itself.
When
the
sounding
board
isn’t
a
young
associate
who
takes
a
day
to
mull
over
the
problem,
but
a
well-informed
algorithm
offering
instant
answers,
the
workflow
loses
those
built-in
speed
bumps.
It’s
still
iterative
(if
users
continue
to
let
it
be
iterative),
but
without
the
downtime
historically
reserved
for
rethinking.
How
many
times
have
lawyers
had
epiphanies
during
those
moments
when
the
draft
is
out
of
their
hands?
When
that
time
gets
compressed,
so
do
those
periods
of
reflection.
It’s
not
that
the
AI
will
steer
lawyers
wrong,
but
that
lawyers
will
be
increasingly
bad
at
noticing
when
asking
an
entirely
different
question
could
be
better.
That’s
on
the
lawyers
though.
It’s
up
to
the
professionals
to
be
cognizant
of
AI’s
strengths
and
limitations
as
a
workflow
tool.
Vendors
can
try
to
shape
best
practices
by
keeping
their
rhetoric
focused
on
AI
as
more
of
a
tool
than
some
kind
of
lawyer-in-a-box,
it’s
the
user
who
makes
the
final
call.
And
the
more
a
product
lends
itself
to
being
used,
the
more
likely
it
is
the
user
will
have
an
honest
understanding
of
how
the
product
is
best
used.
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.