ZyLAB Embraces Predictive and Concept Searching
May 25, 2012
The CodeZed blog recently reported on the automated classification of legal documents in the article “Technology Assisted Review, Concept Search and Predictive Coding: The Limitations & Risks.”
According to the article, artificial intelligence and machine learning has been around since the 1980’s but a recent US ruling regarding the use of machine learning technology in legal review has stirred up trouble in the eDiscovery community. As a result of this ruling, one can expect a dramatic increase in Predictive Coding, Concept Search or other terms relating to TAR capabilities being a requirement for eDiscovery software buyers.
When discussing some of the detriments of machine learning and artificial intelligence, the article states:
“Machine-learning requires significant set-up involving training and testing the quality of the classification model (aka the classifier), which is a time consuming and demanding task that requires at least the manual tagging and evaluation of both the training and the test set by more than one party (in order to prevent biased opinions). Testing has to be done according to best practice standards used in the information retrieval community (e.g. see the proceedings of the TREC conferences organized by the NIST). Deviation from such standards will be challenged in courts. This is time consuming and expensive and should be factored into the cost-benefit analysis for the approach.”
So the short of it is, before using Technology Assisted Review make sure that you do your research and figure out what is best for your business.
Jasmine Ashton, May 25, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
