Just hunker down and get your work done:
Would this be due to them not doing the actual work they used to do???
jk (sorta)
2 Likes
I followed all the links back to the Upwork post about their research, but still could not really find out how they had come to the conclusions they claim in the abstract. What were their method for measuring “increased productivity” or “boosted creativity” by using AI tools? Not clear at all. Claims that legal professionals using AI are “completing rote tasks with fewer errors” are interesting. How was the output checked for correctness and measured against what baseline? As per usual, there was no definition of “AI” either - are we talking about Generative AI only here or do we include the wider definiton of AI to cover automation engines, machine learning algorithms etc?
Unsurprisingly, the highest boost for LLMs were in areas of language related tasks.
There was a big headline about clients having higher trust in output where Human+AI was producing the output. Less obvious was that Human+AI were rated higher than AI Only output, yet still lower than Human only output.
Bottom line from their abstract:
“Once again, we’re seeing that while AI is influencing the job to be done within these evolving categories, the work still requires human involvement that can’t be replicated by AI.”
3 Likes
Studies around AI are, at best, rough indicators of common trends. Given that people and businesses have different goals, different levels of experience with AI and are using different tools, its hard to find studies with conclusions that apply globally.
3 Likes