{{vm.title}}
25{{vm.includesText}}
{{item}}
{{vm.selectText}}
{{ vm.welcomeLabel.trim() }},
{{ vm.userName }}
{{ vm.text }}
{{vm.newUser1}} {{vm.newUser2}} {{vm.newUser3}} {{vm.newUser4}}
{{ vm.unknownUser }}
{{ vm.title }}
{{ vm.title }}
{{ vm.title }}
- {{ vm.siteSelectorList.flyout.cell1.heading }} {{ site.countryLocale }} {{ vm.siteSelectorList.flyout.cell1.global.countryLocale }}
{{ vm.closeTabLabel }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell2.title }} {{ vm.flyout.cell2.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell2.title }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell3.title }} {{ vm.flyout.cell3.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell3.title }}
- {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.label }} {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.newTabAllow }} {{ vm.flyout.cell1.viewAll.label }}
Some cautionary thoughts on "predictive coding"
Some cautionary thoughts on "predictive coding"
Pros and cons of using predictive coding or technology-assisted review to manage the litigation discovery process.
Using predictive coding or technology-assisted review to manage litigation discovery
Discovery has always been a part of litigation, investigations and regulatory inquiries. The huge volumes of data and the increasing complexity of matters can increase the cost of the e-discovery (discovery of electronic information) to unacceptable levels. In recent years, software companies have been offering the next generation of concept-based search and classification technology: predictive coding or technology-assisted review. The fourth edition in the Forensic Focus series weighs in on the pros and cons of using this approach to manage the discovery process.
