Setting Realistic Expectations

Setting Realistic Expectations About AI in eDiscovery: eDiscovery Best Practices

Is artificial intelligence (AI) supposed to replace humans in the process? This article from ProSearch goes about setting realistic expectations about AI in eDiscovery!

The article in ILTA’s Peer to Peer Magazine (The Humans Stay in the Picture: 4 Realities of AI in Modern eDiscovery, written by Dr. Gina Taranto of ProSearch) discusses setting realistic expectations about AI in eDiscovery, with four key points. Here’s one of them.

There isn’t an easy button.

Too often, the impression is created that AI is some version of an “easy button” solution for search and information retrieval needs. The recent push for pretrained models and AI products only adds to the notion that AI is an instant turnkey solution. Pretrained models can indeed provide a great jump-start for a matter. They certainly do make elements of discovery easier and more efficient. But they aren’t magic. Some pretrained models still require upfront work – sometimes called “training” or “tuning” – before they are ready to go. And just like with more traditional TAR solutions, workflows built around pretrained models require a step that involves running them against your data, taking samples, measuring results, and adjusting when needed. The most effective workflows allow for time to deploy compensatory strategies in specific areas where pretrained models underperform. Yes, AI involves automation, but automatic is not auto-magic.

Over ten years ago, New York Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck stated in the Da Silva Moore case that “computer-assisted review is not a magic, Staples-Easy-Button, solution”, yet so many in the legal community expect “turnkey” AI and machine learning, which leads to disappointment. Kudos to Gina for setting realistic expectations about AI in eDiscovery – catch the rest of her points regarding what to expect here!

So, what do you think? Do you think legal professionals expect too much out of AI? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Leave a Reply