I read with interest the recent post by my fellow Above the Law columnist, Bob Ambrogi, on a study about the disparity of results found when using various legal research tools. Those findings caught my attention because Id encountered that very phenomenon when conducting research for this article. As I tested the built-in AI features of Westlaw and LexisNexis, I noticed that identical queries entered into each platform typically led to very different sets of results. <\/p>\n
Of course, thats one of the legal research problems artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to solve. When natural language processing is based not just on the words entered into the search box, but on the past behavior of the user and other users whove made similar inquiries, the results should ultimately be more uniform across the board. The idea is that since the results are based on a broad set of data analytics rather than just an analysis of the terms entered, the results will be more precisely aligned to the information that the user was seeking to obtain. <\/p>\n
Or, as Jamie Buckley, Chief Product Officer at LexisNexis explained to me when we discussed the newly released AI feature, Lexis Answers: One primary area of focus isusing our content, along with natural language processing and customer data to provide better search results. Our goal is to use customer data in aggregate to make the information we provide better. So we try to help the user to understand what the user really needs. <\/p>\n
Lexis Answers is the first step toward achieving this goal. Using natural language processing and AI, this tool, which is built into the Lexis Advance legal research platform, identifies key phrases from the users query and provides responsive results, sometimes including a Lexis Answers Card in cases where there is a single best result, followed by the more familiar list of additional relevant results. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Lexis Answers is currently limited to 5 types of queries legal definitions, standards of review, burdens of proof, legal doctrine, and elements of a claim although there are plans to expand the number of categories in the future. <\/p>\n
Not surprisingly, Thomson Reuters[1] is also incorporating AI technologies into its legal research platform. In 2015, it rolled out Westlaw Answers, which provides a specific response to certain set types of queries, just as Lexis Answers does. The Westlaw Answers results are triggered if the user clicks on a suggested search query. <\/p>\n
Westlaw also includes two other features powered by AI: Research Recommendations and Folder Analysis. Both are driven by the users interaction with the search results. Research Recommendations are made as you click on results and are intended to point you in the right direction by suggesting certain documents or Key Numbers that may be relevant to your research. <\/p>\n
Folder Analysis is a feature that I find to be particularly useful. After youve placed a few documents into a folder, the folder contents are analyzed and additional cases are recommended to you based on the issues identified as a result of the folder analysis. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When I spoke to Thomson Reuters representatives (Mike Dahn Senior Vice President, Westlaw Product Management, Khalid Al-Kofahi Vice President, Research & Development; andErik Lindberg Senior Director, Westlaw Product Management) about their AI features and plans for the future, I learned that one of their top goals is to continue along this vein and use AI tools to analyze user interaction to provide the most relevant and efficient search results. As Mike Dahn explained, We want to disambiguate user queries by listening throughout the session for signals of relevance so that we can identify the topics theyre most interested in, and thats whereresearch recommendations and folder analysis come in. <\/p>\n
Following these calls, I found myself excited about the future of legal research. While legal research is not a particularly sexy topic, AI is. AI has the potential to dramatically change the practice of law in a number of different ways in the very near future, and legal research is one of the areas that will be affected the most. <\/p>\n
Legal research has been and continues to be a relatively mundane and tedious aspect of our daily lives as lawyers. If AI can drastically reduce the amount of time lawyers spend conducting research by providing increasingly relevant results, much more quickly, then lawyers can (happily) focus on the more interesting aspects of practicing law. <\/p>\n
Were on the cusp of an AI revolution and each company has access to hoards of data, both in terms of content and user interaction with their products. In other words, each of these legal industry behemoths is uniquely positioned to take advantage of the next stage of technological advancement. <\/p>\n
As a result, it was heartening to hear representatives from both LexisNexis and Thomson Reuters discuss AI and its potential impact on the future of law with such passion, precision, and vision. Of course, the real question is: can their visions come to fruition? As we all know, its not always easy for large, established companies (think Kodak and Xerox) to shift gears and pivot with the times. Will Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis be different? That remains to be seen. Tune in tomorrow and see. <\/p>\n
[1] By way of disclaimer, I am a Thomson West author and as a result I receive complimentary access to Westlaw. I also received a 30-day complimentary pass to Lexis Advance for purposes of this post. <\/p>\n
Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York attorney and the Legal Technology Evangelist at MyCase, web-based law practice management software. Shes been blogging since 2005, has written a weekly column for the Daily Record since 2007, is the author of Cloud Computing for Lawyers, co-authors Social Media for Lawyers: the Next Frontier, and co-authors Criminal Law in New York. Shes easily distracted by the potential of bright and shiny tech gadgets, along with good food and wine. You can follow her on Twitter @nikiblack and she can be reached at niki.black@mycase.com<\/a>. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The rest is here: <\/p>\n Legal Research And AI: Looking Toward The Future - Above the Law<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I read with interest the recent post by my fellow Above the Law columnist, Bob Ambrogi, on a study about the disparity of results found when using various legal research tools. Those findings caught my attention because Id encountered that very phenomenon when conducting research for this article. As I tested the built-in AI features of Westlaw and LexisNexis, I noticed that identical queries entered into each platform typically led to very different sets of results. Continue reading