Provided for your review/use is a weekly consolidated listing of Vendor Clips – compiled from online public domain industry news and updates from electronic discovery-centric vendors and commentators.
February 15, 2012
For a running record of Vendor Clips – click here.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 at 12:47 pm. It is filed under chronology, vendors and tagged with archiving, electronic discovery, research, social media, storage, vendors. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Comments are closed.
Since its 2007 introduction, kCura’s Relativity product has become one of the world’s leading attorney review platforms. One of the elements of Relativity’s strong growth and marketplace acceptance has been kCura’s focus on and support of partnerships. Provided as a by-product of review platform research and presented in the form of a simple and sortable table is an aggregation of kCura Premium Hosting Partners and Consulting Partners.
Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations as shared in leading electronic discovery reports, publications and posts over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup shares general worldwide market sizing considerations for both the software and service areas of the electronic discovery market for the years between 2013 and 2018.
Many people are realizing that they have to change the way they work. And tools like technology assisted review are changing the way attorneys work. But it’s not going to replace them. TAR tools can quickly analyze millions of documents for subtle patterns, but only humans can decide what’s important to the case, or what stories the documents can tell. So these systems are hybrids: The machines do what they do best, and the humans do what they do best. There will be plenty of work to go around for skilled practitioners who know the tools and have the right skillsets.
Daily we read, see and hear more and more about the impact new technologies can make on the practice of information governance (IG) and eDiscovery (EDD). This week’s cartoon and clip highlights the simplicity of many of these new IG and EDD offerings (cartoon) and provides quick links to two new overviews that highlight technologies that are changing the way legal and IT professionals think about the practice of IG and EDD (clip).
By John Tredennick How Technology Assisted Review Works and Why it Matters for Legal Professionals Technology Assisted Review has been a game changer for e-discovery professionals, offering dramatic savings in both time and review costs for savvy clients and their legal counsel. This book confronts the difficult issues with the first generation of TAR applications, […]
The second filter begins where the first leaves off. The ESI has already been purged of unwanted custodians, date ranges, spam, and other obvious irrelevant files and file types. Think of the First Filter as a rough, coarse filter, and the Second Filter as fine grained. The Second Filter requires a much deeper dive into file contents to cull out irrelevance. The most effective way to do that is to use predictive coding, by which I mean active machine learning, supplemented somewhat by using a variety of methods to find good training documents.
It’s when you can combine the advantages of continuous learning with the flexibility that non-expert training gives you that TAR really starts to come alive. CAL means a lower total number of documents reviewed. Non-expert training means flexibility about how and when you can start the process, not to mention the ability to be massively parallel and cut down total elapsed clock time. Instead of having to wait, as you do in SAL and SPL, for your expert to have free time in order to train documents, with these two busted Myths you can hit the ground running, and be done long before your SPL or SAL may have even started.
ComplexDiscovery | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International