Page 1 of 1
Dutch Legal AI Research Survey
Your responses will help shape the Dutch Legal Research Benchmark, a joint initiative by
Legal Benchmarks
and Zeno that evaluates leading AI models on Dutch and EU legal research problems.
⏱️
8 minutes:
That is all the survey should take.
🔒
Private and anonymised:
Your answers will only be reported in aggregated or anonymised form.
💬
Quotes only with permission:
We will ask for your approval before attributing any quote to you.
What is your name?
*
What is your email address?
*
What is your current role?
*
A
Junior lawyer: 0-3 years' experience
B
Mid-level lawyer: 4-7 years' experience
C
Senior lawyer: 8+ years' experience
D
Partner
E
Legal operations, knowledge or innovation professional
What is the name of your law firm?
*
In which jurisdictions do you primarily work?
*
Select all that apply.
The Netherlands
European Union
International or cross-border
Other (please specify)
What are your primary practice areas?
*
Select up to three.
Corporate, commercial and M&A
Banking and finance
Disputes and investigations
Employment
Data, technology and intellectual property
Regulatory and compliance
Real estate and construction
Energy, infrastructure and environment
Tax
Family and private client
Public and administrative law
Other (please specify)
How frequently do you use AI tools for legal research?
*
A
Daily
B
Several times a week
C
About once a week
D
A few times a month or less
Which technology or AI tools do you usually use for legal research?
*
Include general-purpose tools such as ChatGPT, publisher tools such as LexisNexis, and legal-specific AI tools such as Harvey, Legora or Zeno.
How satisfied are you with the AI tools your firm currently uses for legal research?
*
A
Very satisfied
B
Somewhat satisfied
C
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
D
Very dissatisfied
E
I have not used them enough to assess
Think about the most recent legal research task where you tried using AI but ultimately gave up, redid the research or completed it yourself. What happened?
*
Briefly describe the task, what went wrong and why you could not rely on the answer. Please do not include confidential or identifying information.
What citation error rate would make you stop using an AI tool for legal research?
*
A
More than 5% of citations
B
More than 10% of citations
C
More than 20% of citations
D
Citation errors would not make me stop, provided I could verify the citations
When benchmarking AI for legal research, what should count as a passing answer?
*
A
Every material legal and factual requirement must be correct
B
All important points must be correct, but minor errors can be tolerated
C
The answer can require limited corrections, provided a lawyer can still use it
If AI could reliably take over one part of legal research tomorrow, what would you hand over first?
*
Name a specific task rather than a broad category such as "legal research."
What prevents you from using AI more often for legal research?
*
A
Concerns about accuracy and reliability
B
Confidentiality and data-security concerns
C
Lack of time, training or internal support
D
Poor fit with existing workflows
E
Cost or unclear value
F
Other, please specify
What would you trust most when deciding which AI tool to procure for legal work?
*
A
My firm's own pilot
B
An independent benchmark
C
Recommendations from other lawyers
D
A product demonstration or trial
Which improvement would most increase your use of AI for legal work?
*
A
Higher accuracy and completeness
B
More reliable citations and easier verification
C
Better EU or global coverage
D
Easier integration into my workflow
E
Other
When AI lacks information to answer, what should it do?
*
A
Give best guess
B
Answer with explicit caveats
C
Ask clarifying questions first
D
Say 'I don't know'
E
Other
Do you prefer a verbose but complete answer, or a simple answer that may miss something?
*
A
Complete, but with a short summary on top
B
Clear and simple; I'll ask follow-ups for depth
When using an AI tool, how often does your first prompt produce a usable result without revision or follow-up?
*
A
Usually
B
About half the time
C
Rarely, I iterate several times
How severe is each of these AI failures in legal research?
*
1 = least severe (annoying but quick to fix) and 5 = most severe (unacceptable in work product). You can give the same score to more than one item.
1 (least severe)
2
3
4
5 (most severe)
States incorrect law or facts, or invents authorities or citations
Cites real sources that do not support the claims made, or gives no source
Relies on outdated, non-authoritative, irrelevant or wrong-jurisdiction sources
Omits material issues, facts, arguments or authorities
Identifies the relevant law but applies it poorly or reaches an unsupported conclusion
Fails to turn the analysis into actionable, risk-calibrated advice that reflects the client's objectives and commercial context
Disorganised or verbose answer that needs substantial editing before it can be used as work product
What advice would you give a law firm that is just beginning its AI adoption journey?
*
What is one question about legal AI adoption that you hope this community can help answer?
What will change about legal work by 2041, and what will stay the same?
Would you be interested in contributing a legal research problem to Legal Benchmarks?
Help ensure that Dutch law and your practice area are represented in the tests used to evaluate leading AI models and legal AI applications. Legal Benchmarks will keep the problem private and will not share it with vendors.
A
Yes
B
Not at this time
May we use a quote from your answers in Legal Benchmarks reports?
*
A
Yes
B
No
Would you like to be credited as a contributor to legal AI research?
*
A
Yes
B
No
Submit
