PrepTest 132

[lcid:3626] Prep Test 132 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 21-28  .        Computers have long been utilized in the sphere  . of law in the form of word Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal Studies


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • An exciting prediction that hasn’t come to pass, and why
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Prediction - Computer programs that can practice law
    • Programs have fallen short
    • Why - Difficulty in resolving problems of meaning/applicability

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • One failed approach is discussed
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Approach - Model law as set of rules to be applied
    • Why it failed - Requires interpretations of (sometimes intentionally) undefined laws/terms (far beyond capabilities)
    • Examples

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Another failed approach is discussed
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Approach - Case-based reasoning (compare to precedent)
    • Why it failed - Criteria for similarity set by developer; to work those similarities have to be found by computer system (apparently intractable)

Main Point: Unsurprisingly, attempts to make computer programs that can practice law have failed because of rules that have multiple interpretations and the difficulties in identifying similar precedent.

Key Lines?

Lines 4-6 - An exciting prediction of a product

Lines 8-10 - The products have fallen short

Lines 13-16 - Key reasons they have unsurprisingly failed

Lines 18-23 - One approach to developing the product

Lines 23-25 - Why it failed

Lines 41-44 - Another approach to developing the product

Lines 54-57 - Why it failed

Meta-Structure?

Examples - Paragraph 2 goes into several examples to back up its general contention that these legal programs fail because of interpretation issues. It’s a small part of the passage meant to back up a contention that is only part of the main point, so these Examples don’t define the passage, but it’s likely we’ll get a question or two about them.

Last Thoughts?

A key element as we work through the questions is going to be figuring out which paragraph holds the information key to answering it. While Paragraphs 2 and 3 focus on different approaches to developing the lawyer-replacement programs, there are some similarities between them. They both deal with issues of interpretation - either key legal concepts/language, or cases with similar details. As such, we should really think about which of the two approaches a given question is likely to be asking about before we spend time looking back to the passage!

Question prompt

The passage suggests that Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Remind ourselves of the main point of the passage, then head to the answers, focusing on those that line up with the main point and then using our notes/the passage to find the correct answer

Answer Anticipation

This question stem asks us about the Author’s opinion on a specific topic - but that topic is the central topic of the entire passage. As such, we’ll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by rereading our answer to the main point question). From there, we can head to the answers, deferring on those that don’t line up with the main point. For those that do, we’ll use our notes and the passage to see if it’s correct.

Answer choices

  1. A
    These systems have met Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) (Lines 10-11) The Author says, in Paragraph 1, that these legal reasoning systems have “fallen short of optimistic early predictions,” so the first half of this answer is wrong.

  2. B
    Progress in research on Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) (Lines 34-37; Lines 54-57) For the first approach, the Author says that the fundamental problem is that the computers would need a “fundamental knowledge of the world;” for the second, they’d need to solve an “apparently intractable” problem of being able to compare things themselves. Both of these are theoretical issues, not issues of there not being enough legal documents.

  3. C
    These systems will most Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) The Author brings up reasons that these programs have failed, and she presents no “concession” that they’ll be used for some lesser purpose.

  4. D
    Rule systems will likely Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) (Line 17; Line 38) This answer gets the timeline wrong. Early attempts focused on rule-based systems, but proponents have “now” moved on to case-based reasoners. As such, there’s no indication that even proponents believe that rule systems will replace case-based systems. And that’s proponents of these systems - the Author doesn’t think either will replace anything, as neither works.

  5. E
    Developing adequate legal reasoning Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    (E) (Lines 33-37; Lines 54-57) The rules-based approach would require computers to have knowledge of the world that “is far beyond their capabilities...in the foreseeable future.” The case-based approach faces the “apparently intractable problem” of making a system that can compare cases itself. Both of these are presented as currently insurmountable problems, so the Author must believe that if such programs are to work, it would require a major breakthrough in computer technology. This answer is therefore correct.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion