header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Power tool

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
01 September 2018 / Kelly Atherton
Categories: Features , Profession , Technology
printer mail-detail
828267118-1024x1024

Kelly Atherton discusses how TAR works & why it matters for legal professionals
  • Technology-assisted review tools can support legal professionals in achieving significant time and cost savings.

Technology-assisted review (TAR), an algorithm-based method of classifying documents based on coding input from case subject matter experts (SME), is a powerful tool that can save time and significantly cut costs by reducing the amount of human review needed to locate relevant documents in a data set.  

The adoption of TAR is no longer the exclusive domain of large law firms and Fortune 500 companies. The technology is accessible to mid-size and independent legal practices. However, fear surrounding how this technology works and a lack of understanding of how such technologies can be integrated within existing review workflows is still creating a barrier to adoption for some legal professionals.

How TAR works

TAR, also known as predictive coding, computer-assisted review, or supervised machine learning, is an iterative and interactive process between the SME(s) and the TAR software. The SME reviews and codes electronically stored documents as either relevant

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Read All
Court delays weigh heavily on children
Chronic delays, duplication of work, cancelled hearings and inefficiencies in the family law courts are letting children and victims of domestic abuse down, a Public Accounts Committee (PAC) inquiry has found
NLJ this week: Redrawing boundaries for fiduciary duties and motor finance claims
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
NLJ this week: BBC’s open justice bid fails in care proceedings
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Parliamentary privilege—shield or sword?
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
NLJ this week: Litigation funding must serve justice, not failure
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll