MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1881053730

E-Discovery Revisited: A Broader Perspective for IR Researchers

2007· article· en· W1881053730 on OpenAlexaff
Jack G. Conrad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Law
Canadian institutionsThomson Reuters (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Computer scienceTask (project management)Data sciencePerspective (graphical)Field (mathematics)NISTDomain (mathematical analysis)Order (exchange)Information retrievalTrack (disk drive)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingEngineeringSystems engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a very positive development that NIST’s Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) has added a track focusing on the legal (discovery) domain. Its organizers should be acknowledged for their commitment and hard work to establish preliminary tasks and arranging initial assessments. In order to ensure that the track evolves into a realistic and relevant field of study, future tracks will need to accurately reflect the nature and scope of the actual E-Discovery task, or series of tasks, at hand.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0090.061
Scholarly communication0.0420.088
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0310.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in LawFrench-language works237,207