Now that we’ve got the technical part out of the way, let’s talk about how conceptual engines work.
Think of it like this; the engine is actually looking to see if Bag of Words A contains similar words, or combinations of words to Bag of Words B. If they do, then they are conceptually related to each other. If they do not, then they are not conceptually related to each other. Yes, it is more technical than that, but that is the best way to visualize how these tools function.
A lesson in what not to do using Voom vs. EchoStar as an example. In 2005, Voom and EchoStar entered into a 15 year affiliation agreement. The agreement required EchoStar to include Voom channels as part of its packaged services. Fast forward a few years and EchoStar wanted out because they did not feel they were getting the best deal.
GUEST BLOG By John Patzakis, Founder and CEO of X1 Discovery
As mentioned in my last post, many law firms and eDiscovery service providers have in recent months extensively discussed social media discovery in a general fashion. Such dialogue is important and educational, but it is great to see the innovative service firm D4 highlighting their major league, battle tested social media discovery capabilities….
If you were even barely conscious at LegalTech New York this past week, you got the message that Technology Assisted Review (TAR), also known as, “Predictive Coding”, has come of age. The litigation support industry considers this a settled matter, a done deal, an approach which, if you have not yet used it, or at least wrapped your brain around it, you are behind.
“Predictive Coding” (future link to Recommind’s cease and desist letter), “Technology Assisted Review”, “Categorization”…whatever you want to call it…the new trend in e-discovery is trying to utilize technology that you’re probably already familiar with.
D4 just returned from LegalTech New York 2012. Predictive Coding, Technology Assisted Review (TAR), Computer Assisted Review (CAR), Automated Categorization – whatever-you-want-to-call-it – was the “soup du jour,” as we predicted some time ago.
Facebook and other social networking sites (SNS) are going to be a hot topic in eDiscovery for 2012. D4 discussed this in an earlier post. Many of our clients have responded to that post and asked D4 how they can view social media ESI in a review tool. The answer is that it depends on how the ESI is collected and what review tool you are using.
One has only to glance at the 2012 schedule for LegalTech New York to see Technology Assisted Review (TAR) is the “key theme” of this year’s show. Consider your experience with Amazon or Netflix where the system “suggests items” based on what you’ve previously chosen. TAR applies that same concept to prioritizing document review by leveraging human intelligence with a computer system. TAR is also referred to as “Computer Aided Review” and can be based on different technologies such as Categorization (Relativity Assisted Review) or Predictive Coding (Equivio Relevance).
The message is that counsel has to get a handle on their clients’ data and architecture in preparing for discovery. Otherwise, says Judge Timothy Hillman, U.S. Magistrate Judge for the District of Massachusetts, they’ll be in my courtroom “facing down the barrel of my gun”.
Will the New Rules ever feel like old news? Will predictive coding face legal or scientific challenge? Will social media become just another source of ESI? Will we ever find the holy grail of litigation support? Take a look, mix it up, leave a comment, a kudo, or a prediction of your own.
© 2012 D4 Discovery all rights reserved | Design by 
