Designing an AI Searching experience for the European Union Parliament

Finding regulations or laws is tough, especially for non-experts. How can they even start and be sure they’ve got the right, accurate info? Even legal pros struggle sometimes 😕. Euro Law (formerly Eur-Lex) is a new search tool for the EU Parliament’s regulations and laws, which is the EU’s lawmaking body. It’s for everyone from politicians to regular folks needing specific legal information in their huge library.

 

Task

To redesign navigation and search functionalities, incorporating new design patterns and AI enhancements, to accelerate information retrieval for both internal teams and external users.

  • Strategy

    Design Sprints, Workshops

  • Design

    Research, Product Design, Prototyping

  • Client

    Euro Law - Smashing Magazine

⬤ 01. my role

Product UX designer

This project was the final assessment for the course Design Patter for Ai Interfaces by Vitale Friedman.

 

My role as the rest of the team of students was researching about the current problem and design the solution and  UX experience using the correct Ai patterns for the interfaces.

⬤ 02. PROJECT GOAL

Boosting search efficiency and accessibility

This project aims to enhance information accessibility across multiple websites by improving the search functionality. By doing so, we want to help both internal and external stakeholders find information more quickly

We want to

Reduce search failure rates by 50%.

Decrease time in finding relevant information by 30%.

⬤ 03. RESEARCH

Finding patterns in the data

Task analysis

We worked with members of the European Parliament to work on task analysis using analytic tools. This identified the primary tasks performed by both internal and external users on the website. The analysis also assessed the platform’s effectiveness in guiding users to relevant content and documents.

Our team was given access to the European Parliament’s analytics and feedback from the site.

Pain points and needs

0
1. Perform tasks

Many internal and external users aren't able to perform the task they want to do on European Parliament's websites

0
2. Searching

Search is either too broad (returns too many similar pages/sites), or too narrow (shows irrelevant results for one particular website)

0
3. Mismatched information

There is a mismatch between the priorities presented on the site and the priorities that EU citizens and EP staff have in mind

0
4. Lack of context

Users coming from search engines often lack context of where they are and where they can go next

0
5. Noise and duplication

Information is scattered all over departments, often duplicated and contradicting each other; and often presented in a way that makes it difficult to understand and find answers quickly

Digging through analytics

Analysis showed that the overwhelming majority of website traffic comes from search engines, split evenly between mobile (52%) and desktop. Users primarily seek news, facts, or reference materials. This confirms information consumption, not engagement.

Top search terms

  • 1. EU treaties, laws, rules, judgments
  • 2. Implementation of EU law
  • 3. Transparency, ethics, standards of conduct
  • 4. Legislation impact (societal, country, economic)
  • 5. Freedom of information, request access to documents

As you can see it is a varied mix of content.

⬤ 04. USER PERSONA

Internal and external users

Through research we identified 2 types of users:
  • internal users (MEPs, assistants, lobbyists, administration, liaison offices, content managers)
  • external users (EU citizens, journalists, educators, law implementation specialists, lawyers)
⬤ 05. ideation

Using event storming in a discovery workshop

Ideation workshop

The  team conducted an event storming workshop to map the entire user journey for the search flow. This collaborative and visual approach, using a Miro board and sticky notes, resulted in a comprehensive blueprint that informed our wireframing process and encouraged creative problem-solving.

Current task flows mapped out
User journey, pain points and proposed solution by our team
⬤ 06. ai parameters

Controlling the parameters with temperature and top_p

Even though temperature and top_p are often seen as engineering details, designers need to understand them. These parameters significantly impact how AI behaves and are essential for creating user-friendly AI experiences that meet expectations.

Temperature

Temperature is the measure of entropy or chaos in generated output. It is a setting that controls randomness when picking words during text creation. Low values of temperature make the text more predictable and consistent, while high values let more freedom and creativity into the mix, but can also make things less consistent.

Top_p

Top_p or nucleus sampling is a setting that decides how many possible words to consider. A high top_p value means the model looks at more possible words, even the less likely ones, which makes the generated text more diverse.

Picking the right mix

  • High temperature + low top_p (poetry, music, ideation, writing)
    Creative accuracy: common words put in unpredictable ways.
  • Low temperature + high top_p (legal docs, medical diagnosis, analysis) Predictable precision: rich vocabulary, high clarity.
  • High temperature + high top_p (art, innovation, advertising) Unpredictable chaos: unexpected results and combinations.
  • Low temperature + low top_p (fact checking, analysis, dataviz) Predictable order: deterministic, simple, predictable.

For our purposes we chose a low temperature + low top_p. We want simple predictable results that are targeted at a wide range of users.

⬤ 07. ai patterns

A paradigm shift in how users interact

AI has changed how we interact with technology. While fundamental design principles remain true, the evolution of AI interfaces demand a new approach to user interaction. Here is a selection of patterns I used.

Suggestions

Sample suggestions guide users by offering potential next steps in a conversation. Presented as a list of 3-5 options, these pre-filled suggestions can be selected to continue the interaction easily.

Primary sources

Provide a specific reference point to guide the AI's response. It's difficult to fully convey our intent in a single prompt, but primary sources offer a rich dataset for the AI to analyse.

Personas

For AI tools to be effective, they should produce output that is consistent with your individual style and preferences. Our users expect to see output they are familiar with in their tone and style.

Nudges

Nudges alert users to actions they can take to use AI, especially if they are just getting started as in-app clues or where they serve users.

Inline actions

We need ways to let it interact with our content directly. Inline actions gives users the ability the let AI adjust parts of a piece of content without regenerating or impacting the whole.

Citations

Instead of simply summarising a topic or a primary source, AI can collect information from multiple sources and aggregate it into a single response. Citations help users trace the information contained in a response back to its original material.
⬤ 08. DESIGN EXPLORATIONS

Experimenting with patterns and layout

I started on a journey of exploration to refine the search interface’s user experience. Then experimented with different layouts, information architecture, and interaction patterns to optimise the search flow.

Wireframes explorations

  • We decide to introduce topics as a new search criteria and as suggestions based on the user prompt.
  • By defining the persona (non-mandatory field) upfront before the search is performed we can define the top_p for the AI generative answer:
    Example: For lawyers at high top_p, for citizens low_p.
    Being the temperature always low for this use case.
 

User flow:

⬤ 08. Solution

The finished product

Back