The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on dispute resolution (DR) was touched on in Time for a radical rethink of DR processes: grasp the AI nettle (August 2023) but so rapid is AI's growth (particularly generative AI (GenAI)) that a second commentary seems warranted if only to encourage people to keep up with the tech. (If you still are wondering what AI is, there is no standard definition – but for a succinct explanation ask ChatGPT to "Define [gen]AI" (https://chat.openai.com)).

Predictive coding, a form of AI, is already used regularly in DR/ADR processes. Using e-disclosure software for document review is an example.

GenAI uses machine-learning algorithms to generate new content, a process that is starting to be used, sometimes controversially, in preparing legal documents and in tribunals' decision-making process.

Dentons installed its own version of ChatGPT ("FleetAI") in summer 2023 following much work on data privacy, client confidentiality and in establishing guidance. Current DR-related uses are being monitored and include: early identification of critical issues; summarising case law or long documents to help with analysis or creating chronologies; creating first drafts of correspondence/notes/content/training; translation; drafting/editing text; and legal research (using the results as prompts or inspiration).

AI's potential/inherent risks leave no room for complacency in professional practice. [Gen]AI's time, efficiency and cost benefits must be balanced against risks that include: breach of client confidentiality; erroneous results ("hallucination"); lack of transparency (both as to the source and use of results); and poor quality/false data leading to wrong/biased output.

New guidance to help navigate the risks is starting to emerge such as the Silicon Valley Arbitration & Mediation Center (SVAMC) AI Task Force's Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration. Collaboration is also facilitating idea-sharing on using tech in DR (such as Dubai International Arbitration Centre's partnership with SVAMC).

Recently published results of BCLP's Annual Arbitration Survey 2023 on the Rise of Machine Learning are also instructive in revealing current views on: AI use in preparing legal arguments/submissions (53% against); greater transparency in AI use (60% for); and regulation being needed (63% for).

[Gen]AI adoption in DR practice now requires DR professionals to acquire technological knowledge. Considerable resources are available to improve our understanding of AI and its benefits/risks. You could start by experimenting: ask ChatGPT some questions. Analyse the results. How accurate are they? Sign up to updates from https://www.artificiallawyer.com/ and attend conferences. Read the government's white paper: A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation (published before the AI safety summit and the Bletchley Declaration). Read The Law Society's recommendations (31/10/2023) on the regulatory issues.

If you need an incentive to AI upskilling, consider two questions raised at a recent CiArb discussion: "What does best practice look like?" and "At what point will lawyers become negligent if they do not adopt AI in DR"?

We must adopt a forward-thinking approach to the fast-advancing technology and learn about and get comfortable with its use – all the while striking the right balance between the risks and benefits as touched on above, to ensure efficiency, proportionality and accuracy as well as compliance with our professional duties. Treat AI learning as part of your "CPD", expect some regulation and, in the meantime, if you do use AI, particularly on legal tasks, keep your brain in gear, aim for transparency and check and/or adapt all output.

This article was first published in the Construction Law Magazine on 3 December 2023 (see (2023) 34 10 Cons.Law 33).