Concept Search Vs. Keyword Search
Litigation processes are becoming more complex and the use of advanced technology has become a necessity. Lawyers and judges are turning to electronic discovery for assistance in solving legal proceedings as early as possible. One integral part of the litigation process is search. Searching for relevant information can be both perplexing and non-gratifying when an incorrect approach is implemented, making the whole process worthless and redundant.
Keyword Search
There are two basic types of search that can be accomplished in-house or provided as electronic discovery services. They are keyword search and concept search, though more and more new and innovative searches are making their entries too. The traditional system of electronic data discovery search pertains to keyword search, where an attorney searches for specific terms or phrases that are critically related to the case.
Keyword search is effective when the exact search operations are conducted without any spelling errors or abbreviated versions. The search engine fails to deliver satisfactory results in the case of abbreviations, synonyms, misspelled terms, etc. Keyword search does not have the flexibility to conduct searches on a wide spectrum of terms that could have significant bearing on the case.
Cases are never simple. People indulging in illegal activities usually use obscure expressions and phrases to communicate their actions and outcomes, allowing them to easily slip by. The main drawback of keyword searching is that it can lead to either excessive results, which may or may not be relevant to the case, or to inadequate results, where relevant documents may be eliminated. In either case it can cripple legal proceedings.
Concept Search
In concept search, the tools return a list of documents that not only contain exact terms, but also those that are conceptually related to the topic, providing a wider search scope capability. Concept search depends on sophisticated algorithms to assess the relevance of a set of documents to a concept. Concept search helps identify and group similar documents together, which expedites the reviewing process.
For organizations, a truly effective concept search is particularly helpful as it helps investigators unravel many vague and unanswered questions. The employees of a company who use code words to hide their true intentions can be exposed with the concept search methodology.
Best of both the worlds
Despite concept search being the preferred option for some, as a standalone procedure it cannot give accurate results. Concept searches can also find more than the necessary documents as it searches for related terms as well. This can lead to wasteful results and lose its purpose.
The aim is to cull data, and the use of advanced analytical methodologies is the key to success. The use of keyword search along with concept search can produce the best results and create the most favorable condition for litigations and edisclosure. The keyword search function can be implemented to find results for specific questions like who, what, when, how, why, etc. It can cull the data and remove irrelevant documents to produce a filtered set for review purposes.
Highly targeted concept search can help investigators review cases in a comprehensive manner. The secret is to use the methodology that is best suited for the case and will best help to meet the objectives.
edisclosure, edisclosur,legal electronic discovery, legal e discovery, legal ediscovery, e discovery law firme software, edisclosure solution, edisclosure process, edisclosure processing
<a href=”http://www.clearwellsystems.com/uk/”>edisclosure</a>
<a href=”http://www.clearwellsystems.com/e-discovery-services/index.php”>electronic discovery services </a>
Processing your request, Please wait....
