Here is the abstract:
The TREC 2011 Legal Track consisted of a single task: the learning task, which captured elements of both the TREC 2010 learning and interactive tasks. Participants were required to rank the entire corpus of 685,592 documents by their estimate of the probability of responsiveness to each of three topics, and also to provide a quantitative estimate of that probability. Participants were permitted to request up to 1,000 responsiveness determinations from a Topic Authority for each topic. Participants elected either to use only these responsiveness determinations in preparing automatic submissions, or to augment these determinations with their own manual review in preparing technology-assisted submissions. We provide an overview of the task and a summary of the results. More detailed results are available in the Appendix to the TREC 2011 Proceedings.
Tags: Bruce Hedin, Douglas W. Oard, ediscovery, Electronic discovery, Gordon V. Cormack, Legal evidence information systems, Legal information retrieval, Maura R. Grossman, Relevance in legal information retrieval, Responsiveness in legal information retrieval, Statistical methods in legal informatics, Text Retrieval Conference, Text Retrieval Conference Legal Track, TREC, TREC Legal Track, TREC Legal Track 2011