Predictive Coding and Providers: A 120-Second Survey


Who Does What and With Whom?

Challenge:  With the growing awareness and use of the technology-assisted review feature of predictive coding in the legal arena today, it is increasingly difficult to determine the origin and approach of the actual predictive coding technologies used by leading eDiscovery providers in their offerings.

Goal: To identify the ability, origin and approach of leading eDiscovery providers in relation to the technology-assisted review feature of predictive coding.

Scope: Using a baseline listing (1) of fifty leading eDiscovery providers as aggregated from mentions in formal industry reports published between August 2011 and December 2012 and a general listing (2) of technology-assisted review providers, determine the ability of leading providers to deliver a predictive coding feature and to determine specifics as to the development approach, technology integration, machine learning approach and sampling approach of offered predictive coding features.

Approach:  To provide a short, 120-Second Survey that contains questions designed to identify and define the predictive coding capability of leading eDiscovery vendors.  The survey is non-comprehensive by design and is aimed at creating a starting point for deeper differentiation discussions on provider predictive coding offerings.

Participation:  Representatives of leading eDiscovery providers are encouraged to complete the short 120-Second Survey on behalf of their organizations.  Results of survey (excluding responder contact information) will be aggregated and published on the ComplexDiscovery website for usage by the eDiscovery community.

The 120-Second Survey.

[contact-form-7 id=”5267″ title=”Predictive Coding – Differentiating Considerations”]


(1) Got Technology-Assisted Review? A Short List of Providers and Terms (January 2013), ComplexDiscovery.

(2) Fifty Top Providers: A Short eDiscovery List (December 2012), ComplexDiscovery.

(3) The Grossman-Cormack Glossary of Technology-Assisted Review (2013 Fed. Cts.L. Rev. 7) by Maura Grossman and Gordan Cormack. EDRM.

(4) Is Technology Assisted Review Supporting Attorneys or Replacing Them? (June 2012) by Maura Grossman, Gordan Cormack, Mary Mack, Johannes Scholtes. ZyLAB.

(5) See Maura Grossman and Gordan Cormack. Glossary. January 2013. EDRM.


Current Responders and Results:

Updated 2/22/13 to remove “Statistical” from Sampling Approach “header” and from Judgmental Sampling definition.

Comments are closed.