Based on a website review of leading providers in the electronic discovery arena, the following list provides a quick, non-all inclusive reference of firms that appear to have developed “technology-assisted review” technology (one form of this being “predictive coding”) for their own and/or partner offerings.
“Technology-Assisted Review” Providers
Forms/Terms for “Technology Assisted Review” include:
Click here to provide additions, corrections and/or updates.
This entry was posted on Saturday, January 26th, 2013 at 12:54 pm. It is filed under Blog Slider, chronology, original, Technology-Assisted Review and tagged with archiving, electronic discovery, information governance, research, risk, security, social media, storage, vendors. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Comments are closed.
As part of the eDiscovery process, legal professionals typically use a combination of talent, technology, and techniques to do tasks ranging from preservation to production of electronically stored information. Many of the most often used technologies in this process come in the form of eDiscovery software.
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 software in the electronic discovery market for the years between 2014 and 2019.
Emerging technologies often represent new and innovative approaches to solving difficult problems. They also may have a significantly positive impact on the time, money, and resources required to complete previously daunting tasks. Yet until emerging technologies are effectively commercialized, they may offer users as much peril as promise.
Daily we read, see, and hear more and more about the tension corporate legal departments face as they decide how to source technology and talent for their eDiscovery efforts. Balancing cost, time, and complexity is a continual challenge and what is the right balance today may be out of balance tomorrow. This week our cartoon and clip provides one look at the impact of technology on outsourcing (cartoon), and shares considerations for right sourcing eDiscovery (clip).
Since the advent of Technology Assisted Review (aka TAR, predictive coding or computer-assisted review), one of the open questions is whether you have to run a separate TAR process for each item in a document request. As litigation professionals know, it is rare to have only one numbered request in a Rule 34 pleading. Rather, you can expect to see scores of requests (typically as many as the local rules allow).
ComplexDiscovery | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International