Posts Tagged ‘search’
hide story details [-]
- April 24th
-
BrainSpace Strives to Replace Search Technologies
Enterprise search technology certainly needs a boost, but PureDiscovery claims to have created something to replace the outdated technology altogether. The Dallas-based startup has introduced BrainSpace, a technology that doesn’t index data or require users to search for information on a platform. Instead, information will flow to users based on what they want to know as they [...]
posted at 12:05am on Apr 24th
- April 23rd
-
OpenText Offers Content Auto Classification Solution
Open Text recently reported on a new transparent and defensible auto-classification designed for records managers in the article release “Open-Text Auto Classification.” According to the article, very few companies a sound information governance strategy with appropriate records management services in place and therefore fail to dispose of their unstructured content that is no longer in [...]
posted at 12:15am on Apr 23rd
- April 20th
-
IBM and Its Analytics Roll Up
IBM created WebFountain. In 2004, Searchblog posted a lengthy discussion of a system which would make sense out of the World Wide Web. “WebFountain, the Long Version” was a result of information provided by IBM’s engineers at its Almaden research facility. In 2004, WebFountain was one consequence of “ten years of work at Almaden on [...]
posted at 12:02am on Apr 20th
- April 18th
-
Brainless Blunders in E-Discovery Searches – Legal Talk Network
Brainless Blunders in E-Discovery SearchesLegal Talk NetworkAre you guilty of making big mistakes when it comes to e-discovery searches? On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc., and John W. Simek, V…
posted at 12:18pm on Apr 18th
-
Big Data: The Next Bubble
A colleague in Europe sent me information about a new study sponsored by SAS. To tow the line, I have done work for SAS in the past and we use SAS technology for certain types of analytic work. Nevertheless, the SAS report surprised me with its robust estimate of the uptake of big data, which [...]
posted at 12:01am on Apr 18th
- April 16th
-
Updates on 2011 TREC Results, EDI Project
A pair of updates came to light recently about e-discovery research projects from the Text Retrieval Conference and the Electronic Discovery Institute. Official results from the 2011 TREC Legal Track were scheduled for public release on March 15. “We’ve been promising it in the next week or two for the last four or five weeks,” Legal Track coordinator and University of Waterloo professor Gordon Cormack told me today. Asked if the overview will be published before April is through, “I sincerely hope so,” he said. Unofficial results, dated Oct. 24, 2011, are already circulating but are not endorsed by TREC. I viewed the document while reporting my Dec. 19, 2011 story, “E-Discovery Pitches Meet Sabermetrics.” Today, I was informed that the same document found its way into a Da Silva Moore filing. At the Electronic Discovery Institute, where organizer Patrick Oot is developing a research project sponsored by Oracle, “We will be making our next announcement in about a week or so. We have secured two chief scientists. We will be releasing the protocol for comment to the participants on June 1,” Oot said last Friday. Separately, a startup called BeyondRecognition is doing an interesting project related to TREC’s 2008 results. Look to the Law Technology News tomorrow to read all about it.
posted at 4:48pm on Apr 16th
-
Predictive Coding Watch: ‘Kleen Products’ in Illinois
Meanwhile, back at the ranch … With all eyes on United States District Court Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck’s orders involving “computer-assisted review” and plaintiffs’ challenges in Da Silva Moore in the Southern District of New York, another decision weighing the automated review technology, Kleen Products, LLC, et. al. v. Packaging Corporation of America, et. al., is quietly playing itself out in the Northern District of Illinois. As related in a post by Matthew Nelson on the Electronic Discovery Blog, this time out it’s the plaintiffs challenging the defendants’ discovery methods because they didn’t use predictive coding. In a federal antitrust case before Magistrate Judge Nan Nolan, the plaintiffs attorneys are requesting that the defendants redo production. As Nelson describes it the plaintiffs’ argument appears to be “that defendants should have used predictive coding to avoid the limitations of keyword search tools.” With review 99% complete and over a million documents already produced, as Nelson observes, the plaintiffs’ position doesn’t look that strong — some might even view this as a bid by plaintiffs to have the other side pay for its own culling and filtering. But with a second day of hearings completed March 28 and a third day of hearings scheduled, Da Silva Moore isn’t the only show running. For more on the two cases, check out the eDiscovery Journal and the Document Review MD Blog. Image by Clipart.com
posted at 3:52pm on Apr 16th
-
Kleen Products vs Da Silva Moore: Measurement vs Method
I have read more eDiscovery caselaw and commentary on these two matters in the last month than I ever wanted to. Although the issues around Technology Assisted Review (TAR) are important, it appears that the fervor and hype is being driven primarily by a wide variety of parties who are attempting to capitalize on the matters. Call me naïve, but it astounds me that any eDiscovery consultant or provider participating in an active case would publicize hearing transcripts, create press releases or otherwise put their own interests ahead of their clients. In Da Silva Moore the parties demonstrated laudable cooperation and agreement prior to the first hearing. They agreed to a relatively transparent protocol to tackle a massive collection. All of that has broken down and now there appears to be what could be a concerted effort to discredit magistrate judge Peck and force a recusal. Wow. Would this promising case have turned so acrimonious without the heavy publicity and marketing budgets of TAR providers? Possibly.
posted at 12:21pm on Apr 16th
- April 12th
-
Complexities of Enterprise Search
As more enterprise options flood the market, one would expect the task of tackling enterprise search to be simplified, but it has not been the case. Alan Pelz-Sharpe dives into the complexities of enterprise search infrastructure in the aptly named, “Enterprise Search Is Not Easy.” Three major players dominate the search market: Google, Microsoft, and [...]
posted at 12:11am on Apr 12th
- April 11th
-
Federated Search: A Definition
The phrase “federated search” means subtly different things to different people, and we have noted confusion occasionally arising because of this. It is therefore good to see a new article on the Search Technologies’ Web site clarifying matters. The article defines the task of federated search as: Deploying a search over distributed and possibly heterogeneous [...]
posted at 12:10am on Apr 11th