Bhakti Khera

Lukas Galke, Ansgar Scherp, Andor Diera et al.

We analyze various methods for single-label and multi-label text classification across well-known datasets, categorizing them into bag-of-words, sequence-based, graph-based, and hierarchical approaches. Despite the surge in methods like graph-based models, encoder-only pre-trained language models, notably BERT, remain state-of-the-art. However, recent findings suggest simpler models like logistic regression and trigram-based SVMs outperform newer techniques. While decoder-only generative language models show promise in learning with limited data, they lag behind encoder-only models in performance. We emphasize the superiority of discriminative language models like BERT over generative models for supervised tasks. Additionally, we highlight the literature's lack of robustness in method comparisons, particularly concerning basic hyperparameter optimizations like learning rate in fine-tuning encoder-only language models. Data availability: The source code is available at https://github.com/drndr/multilabel-text-clf All datasets used for our experiments are publicly available except the NYT dataset.

Bhakti Khera, Rezvan Alamian, Pascal A. Scherz et al.

The legal field already uses various large language models (LLMs) in actual applications, but their quantitative performance and reasons for it are underexplored. We evaluated several open-source and proprietary LLMs -- including GPT-series, Anthropic, Deepseek and Llama-3, variants -- on parts of the European Qualifying Examination (EQE) for future European Patent Attorneys. OpenAI o1 led with 0.82 accuracy and 0.81 F1 score, whereas (Amazon Web Services) AWS Llama 3.1 8B lagged at 0.50 accuracy, and a Python-deployed Llama 3.1 8B scored 0.55. The latter two are within the range of mere guessing for the two-answer forced-choice design. None of the evaluated models could have passed the examination fully, as accuracy never exceeded the average threshold of 0.90 required for professional-level standards -- also not models that are regularly promoted for their assumed beyond-PhD- and bar-admitted-lawyer-level performance. GPT-4o excelled at integrating text and graphics, while Claude 3 Opus often lost formatting coherence. Human patent experts evaluated the textual justifications and uncovered various critical shortcomings of each model. They valued clarity and legal rationale over the raw correctness of the answers, which revealed misalignment between automatic metrics and expert judgment. Model outputs were sensitive to modest temperature changes and prompt wording, which underscores the remaining necessity of expert oversight. Future work should target logical consistency, robust multimodality, and adaptive prompting to approach human-level patent proficiency. In summary, despite the outstanding performance of recent large models, the general public might overestimate their performance. The field has a long way to go to develop a virtual patent attorney. This paper wants to point out several specific limitations that need solutions.