What goes through many lawyers’ minds when they hear predictive coding? Very often, fear and loathing. Some ambivalence may be the natural risk aversion that is the attorney’s stock in trade. After all, lawyers are trained to be cautious. They’re not generally known as the epitome of bleeding-edge early adopters. But predictive coding may actually be a boost to attorney document review, not the bust many predict.
Using technology in conjunction with human reviewers to generate probable document classifications (i.e., predictive coding) has generated heated debate both in and out of court. There isn’t even agreement on a name. Some call it technology-assisted review, others, computer-assisted review. In nonlegal circles the underlying technology goes by phrases like machine learning, supervised learning and artificial intelligence, just to name a few.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
