Australia: Further advances in Technology Assisted Review (TAR)

Last Updated: 15 July 2016
Article by Craig Macaulay

1 Introduction

Technology Assisted Review (TAR), or predictive coding, is an alternative to the traditional manual review of documents.

It involves:

  • The manual review by senior members of a legal team of a small subset of documents to identify whether they belong to certain categories (relevant, not relevant, privileged, etc.)
  • Computer analysis to apply the characteristics of the subset to the full population of documents to group them into the same categories. The resulting document set is consistently categorised using a process which is both auditable and repeatable.

Computer Assisted Review (CAR) and Technology Assisted Review (TAR) are interchangeable terms.

More information on TAR is in our publications (TAR and CAR are interchangeable terms)

March 2016 – Forensic Matters: Technology assisted momentum is building
A recent English Case has further paved the way for the use of Technology Assisted Review ('TAR') in Common Law Jurisdictions. In this article we comment on the ten factors seen as pivotal in making this decision.

June 2015 – Forensic Matters: Predicting the future of electronic discovery
Adoption of Technology Assisted Review to increase worldwide following decision by the Irish High Court. In this article, we discuss the landmark decision made by the Irish High Court, which may pave the way for the use of TAR in Australia.

February 2013 – Forensics Matters: Death, taxes and computer assisted review
Has the time come for a radical change in how eDiscovery is undertaken? When we consider all of the events that are taking place in courts the world over, perhaps computer assisted review (CAR), which includes predictive coding, should be adopted as best practice, especially in cases involving large amounts of electronically sourced information (ESI).

July 2012 – Forensics Matters: Is Predictive coding the electronic discovery 'Magic Bullet'?
Predictive coding is the emerging tool of choice in the fight against the escalating size and related cost of managing and disclosing electronically stored information ('ESI'). In this article, we consider how some recent cases involving predictive coding may affect the future of eDiscovery.

To some it is bewildering that TAR has not been more widely adopted. Cynics might suggest that lawyers have fees to lose. But we believe it's not as simple as that. The complex statistics involved in some of the TAR protocols used, together with a natural level of inertia and fear of the unknown, have combined to slow the acceptance and use of TAR. Another key factor is that TAR requires an acceptance that any review process is imperfect.

At KordaMentha Forensic we maintain the position that a more intuitive non-statistical TAR protocol will always be more palatable. Recent studies show that human-aligned protocols are both more workable and more efficient.

A recent article1 by Maura Grossman and Gordon Cormack on the current state of TAR in the electronic document review marketplace, points out that:

  1. There are a number of protocols which can be used when undertaking TAR. New protocols recently developed can be even more efficient in reviewing documents.
  2. Different TAR products use algorithms to perform TAR. They discuss the effectiveness of the various algorithms.

Grossman and Cormack are leading the research into TAR. They have published a number of ground-breaking studies on document review. Their latest study2 in late 2014 compares the effectiveness of the protocols currently available.

2 The adoption of TAR in the United States has been slow

Grossman and Cormack lament that the adoption of TAR has been very slow in the USA despite strong judicial support, and the significant cost and time advantages. They suggest that the protocols and algorithms in the most commonly used protocols – such as Simple Active Learning (SAL) and Simple Passive Learning (SPL) – contain complex statistical vocabulary and rituals which dissuade practitioners from using TAR. However, none of them are essential. They argue that using a new, simpler protocol, more resembling a Web-search methodology, will encourage greater adoption of the technology.

Continuous Active Learning (CAL) is more efficient

The CAL protocol removes the complexity of statistical control sets, random samples etc. Instead, it relies on the ongoing stream of documents coded by reviewers. The TAR algorithm uses this coding to continually re-define the documents that are presented for review and further coding, until the legal team is comfortable that they have identified and reviewed the potentially relevant documents.

The research by Grossman and Cormack showed that CAL produces a much more efficient form of TAR. Using CAL, manual review was lower, but the number of relevant documents found was higher. The average saving in the manually reviewed documents was 5%. This represented an average of 36,250 documents per case: the equivalent of 72.53 lawyer review days. These savings are over and above the significant savings that can be achieved by moving from traditional manual review to the earlier protocols of TAR (often referred to as TAR version 1.0).

3 How does CAL differ to other forms of TAR?

Using the CAL protocol both reduces and simplifies the steps involved in the process when compared to SAL or SPL: see the Appendix.

As well as being more efficient, CAL has a number of other benefits:

Advantage Explanation
CAL is more flexible when introducing new documents to a corpus The control set for SAL or SPL needs to be a statistical representation of the corpus. If the corpus changes, a new control set is needed to be a statistical representation of the new corpus.
CAL is more flexible if the criteria for a relevant document change during the legal proceedings If criteria change, the process of creating a control needs to be created from the start again.
The legal team does not need to pre-determine an acceptable level of risk. Following the CAL process, the legal team continues to review documents and train the algorithm until they are comfortable that they have reviewed the potentially relevant documents. The SAL and SPL protocols require the legal team to determine an F-Score which is measure of the recall and precision the legal team wish to accept. In essence this is measure of how much error (not finding relevant documents) is acceptable. This is traditionally something that legal teams have struggled with.
No need to create a control set Control sets often encounter problems. For example, selecting a control set which turns out not to contain even one relevant document, thereby rendering the control set useless for the SAL protocol.In our experience it is common to create many control sets which fail. This destroys much of the benefit of using TAR
No need to create random samples As with control sets, random samples with a large corpus will often not include any relevant documents. While further training of the algorithm can occur, it is not very efficient unless relevant documents are included in conducting the re-training.
CAL gives the legal team much more control over the process. Rather than the statistical formula telling the legal team when to stop reviewing documents, the decision is made by the legal team.This allows the reviewers to quickly identify legally significant documents, and to adapt the process when new documents are added, or new issues or interpretations arise.

KordaMentha Forensic's experience using TAR is consistent with Grossman's and Cormack's findings. In practice, using random sampling in large corpuses of data becomes very inefficient, especially if there are few relevant documents in the corpus. Often random samples will contain no relevant documents at all to further enhance the training algorithm.

Interestingly, the CAL protocol follows generally accepted methods of implementing artificial intelligence (AI). 'Deep learning' AI algorithms work by a human telling the AI algorithm what he or she thinks is correct or important, based on a small set of documents. The AI algorithm uses this input to analyse all of the data to determine what is correct or important and what is not. This is undertaken as an iterative process similar to CAL.

4 KordaMentha Forensic's Input to the CAL process

KordaMentha Forensic has been using a form of CAL, which we call Continuous Review, when implementing TAR. As part of our Continuous Review protocol we determine the next sets of documents to review, as part of the ongoing training process, using four key criteria to identify documents which;

  1. Are categorised as 'highly relevant' by the software.
  2. Are on the threshold of being categorised relevant or not relevant by the software.
  3. Have been tagged as 'non-relevant' by a reviewer, but which, based on analytics, appear to contain concept and textual similarities to documents which were tagged as relevant by a reviewer.
  4. Based on analytics, show volatility in categorisation over a number of training rounds. For example where a document moves from being categorised as relevant to not relevant and back again over a number of training rounds.

Reviewing these types of documents will improve the accuracy of the results from the algorithm and allow the legal team to see the documents being identified as most likely to be relevant by the algorithms, and the issues that these documents raise.

5 Not All TAR algorithms are the same

Different eDiscovery tools use different underlying algorithms to perform TAR. Grossman and Cormack also compare the effectiveness of the different types of algorithm.

6 Conclusion

We believe that simplified and intuitive CAL protocols and workflows, such as our 'continuous review', will help to remove many of the current barriers – real or perceived – to the legal profession embracing TAR. Ongoing cost pressures from general counsel will also help to encourage litigators to consider TAR. Further, the Australian judiciary is showing increasing interest in the use of these sorts of technologies to ensure that discovery/disclosure is undertaken in a proportionate manner. We believe that a successful Australian test case on TAR is unlikely to be far away as the eDiscovery revolution continues.


1Grossman, Maura R and Cormack, Gordon V: Continuous Active Learning For TAR, April/May 2016 E-Discovery Bulletin.

2Maura R. Grossman & Gordon V. Cormack: Evaluation of Machine-Learning Protocols for Technology-Assisted Review in Electronic Discovery, 2014 Proceedings of the 37th Ann. Int'l ACM SIGIR Conf. on Research & Dev. in Info. Retrieval, 153-62 (2014).

3Based on a reviewer reviewing 500 documents per day.

4Recall – The fraction of Relevant Documents that are identified as Relevant by a search or review effort.

5Precision – The fraction of Documents identified as Relevant by a search or review effort that are in fact relevant.

6Based on Grossman, Maura R and Cormack, Gordon V; Continuous Active Learning For TAR, April/May 2016 E-Discovery Bulletin.

7Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd & Oors -v- Quinn & Oors [2015] IEHC 175.

8Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, Case No. 1:11-cv-01279.

9Overturns are documents which have been predicted by the algorithm as relevant but after another round of training the document is re-predicted as not relevant.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions