EDRM Demythigator, alligator in a trenchcoat, with magnifying glass, with AI in the background

Dear Demythigator: Will using AI/ML replace my entire review team?

Demythigator’s response:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) are designed to augment what review teams can do, not replace them entirely.  Review is still required in AI/ML workflows, but is focused on data more likely to be relevant so that less time is spent reviewing non-relevant information. AI/ML can help the review team find relevant data faster by having the review team review the most relevant data first, as compared to a traditional linear review.  AI/ML can often even help the review team find potentially relevant data with more speed than custodial, date, or keyword-based prioritizations that are sometimes employed to expedite linear review.  By design, AI/ML typically reduces (sometimes quite considerably) the amount of time the review team spends reviewing non-relevant data. This allows the review team to re-allocate review resources to higher value-added tasks such as case strategy or further fact development or additional types of investigatory review.

Agree or disagree? Share your thoughts in the comments! Have thoughts you prefer not to share on social media for this myth or ideas or suggestions for future myths to tackle? Send those to info@edrm.net, and visit the EDRM blog


  • Analytics & Machine Learning Project Group 4-Demythigator Team

    The Demythigator Project is designed to dispel myths about artificial intelligence (“AI”), analytics and machine learning as applied to legal challenges. The Demythigator Project’s goal is to start a discussion in the eDiscovery community to begin to take these myths head on with help from a friendly but fearless Demythigator. We'd love to hear from you. Email us at info@edrm.net or see us here.

    View all posts

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.