Technology-Assisted Review in E-Discovery Can Be More Effective and More Efficient Than Exhaustive Manual Review¶
Grossman, M. R., & Cormack, G. V. (2011). Technology-Assisted Review in E-Discovery Can Be More Effective and More Efficient Than Exhaustive Manual Review. Richmond Journal of Law and Technology.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Search Filter
- The guarding discipline is to measure recall against a known-positive sample and keep the removed set inspectable via the coverage report, so that over-cutting shows up as a number
This sourceMakes document-review over-cutting quantitatively visible through recall.
- The guarding discipline is to measure recall against a known-positive sample and keep the removed set inspectable via the coverage report, so that over-cutting shows up as a number
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:03a4cd032ada · see in the full table