ccossett Posted September 12, 2019 Report Share Posted September 12, 2019 My team has been using Vound products for years and the following are items that we would love to see added or changed in the current offering of Intella: Add the capability that forces families to sort in order (i.e. parent before children, etc). This would help when reviewing and producing documents. For example, if we sort by "Family Date" it should sort families together so that we can produce with families together or review families in that order. Add a number of new fields to help better track families, as it is a challenge currently. Below are some field changes we would like to see: Change Item IDs so that they are in order by family or add a separate field that has a file level ID that allows the attachments to be in order with the parent files. Create a Family ID column (all files in a family have same ID) so that the files can be sorted by the field and kept families together or so that families can easily be figured out on a report, etc. Create a Family Hash or Parent Hash field so that all files in a family have the same hash value as the parent file. Helps if custom de-duplication needs to be done. Add the capability to de-duplicate on a family level instead of on a file level. Enhance production capabilities so they are more standard for eDiscovery. For example, for emails it is possible to not include standard meta-data fields in the image but it should be standard for eDiscovery to always show the same information. Let me know if you have any questions, concerns, or need clarification on the items above. Thanks! Corey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamS Posted September 17, 2019 Report Share Posted September 17, 2019 Corey I suspect you can accomplish some (if not all) of this currently by using custom columns and then creating an overlay to import back in to the case. I currently have quite a few custom columns that I add to a case before I index any data to avoid the need for reindexing. The parent/child relationship is created when preparing Loadfiles, so I suspect there a way you can leverage this back into the case with an overlay. Sorry I don't have the time at the moment to run any tests and provide you something definitive, but I suspect Jon won't be too far behind in providing something more substantial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamS Posted September 20, 2019 Report Share Posted September 20, 2019 Okay Corey, I've found myself with some time on my hands so ran a test on some existing data which I had already used to create a Relativity load file. Below are the steps I took and the results achieved when importing the overlay back into the case. First step is to setup custom columns, I like to do this prior to indexing my source data. Basically add sources but do not index, then once the custom columns are setup go back and 'reindex' the data. You don't have to do this, you can index your data then add custom columns, however you will need to reindex after adding custom columns so you are better off time wise to index only once if you can set your workflow that way. 1. Custom Columns For what you are trying to achieve I would setup the following custom columns (the names are not important, those are just what I use). DOCID PARENT_DOCID ATTACH_DOCID BEGINGROUP ENDGROUP I set these up without mapping them to any specific fields in the Properties or RAW DATA tabs, so I just use the options like the pic below, this just creates a column without any data populated. They need to be kept blank in this instance so I can map them when I overlay the loadfile data. 2. Loadfile Creation After the data is indexed and the loadfile data selection is done it's time to create my loadfile, ensuring I use the same names as my custom columns for continuity, the pics below show the field selection options I chose for these fields when creating the load file: DOCID - Default field created when you setup the loadfile, depending on your naming conventions it will be something like PREFIX.000001.0000023 PARENT_DOCID - exactly what it sounds like, the same naming convention but reflecting the parent document ATTACH_DOCID - as you would expect, the child items BEGINGROUP - This is the first file in a group, which will be the parent ENDGROUP - The final file in a group, ie the last child item For the purpose of this discussion you can ignore the BATES numbering columns. The below picture is an excerpt of my load file showing the relationships are captured at the loadfile creation using the DOCID numbers. 3. Import .DAT Loadfile as Overlay Now go to File-->Import Loadfile Change the Import Operation to "Overlay", then use the "..." button to navigate to your .DAT file from the loadfile you just created and click 'next'. You should now have something like the screen below Now we need to map the columns from the loadfile to the custom columns you created. Click 'Next' then begin the mapping exercise You don't have to map all the fields, just the ones you need, in the right hand box under 'Intella Columns' locate the custom fields you created, highlight then click the left blue arrow to move that across to match the corresponding load file field you want to map it to. Once you have all the desire fields mapped click 'import'. IMPORTANT - it's very important the you have the overlay options (top left) field correctly setup otherwise the import will not work. I have use the MD5 hash as this is part of my loadfile, however the ITEM_ID would be the logical choice provided this is part of your loadfile. Screenshot below shows my new fields exposed buy unpopulated at the beginning of the overlay import (the column with numbers is the Item ID field). This overlay import was for 26k items and took about 15 minutes. The screenshot below shows after the process has completed and you can see the new fields have been populated. Now to address your specific needs Quote 1. Add the capability that forces families to sort in order (i.e. parent before children, etc). This would help when reviewing and producing documents. For example, if we sort by "Family Date" it should sort families together so that we can produce with families together or review families in that order. This is now achievable simply by sorting by the DOCID field Quote Add a number of new fields to help better track families, as it is a challenge currently. Below are some field changes we would like to see: Change Item IDs so that they are in order by family or add a separate field that has a file level ID that allows the attachments to be in order with the parent files. Create a Family ID column (all files in a family have same ID) so that the files can be sorted by the field and kept families together or so that families can easily be figured out on a report, etc. Create a Family Hash or Parent Hash field so that all files in a family have the same hash value as the parent file. Helps if custom de-duplication needs to be done. 1. Sorting by DOCID achieves this 2. The BEGINGROUP is what you want here I think, this is the parent file and first file in a family 3. I'm not sure I understand the goal here. The very nature of hashes is to be unique so it would go against all forensic procedures to have different files with the same hash. What sort of custom deduping are you wanting. Perhaps this can be achieved now with the custom fields. Quote 3. Add the capability to de-duplicate on a family level instead of on a file level. This is another one I'm not sure that I'm understanding correctly. If you mean if you have 2 emails which both contain exactly the same children items? If that's the case a normal dedupe would take care of that now as all items would have duplicates. If you mean you have 2 identical parent emails but then have slightly different children and you want to only keep one of those parents and the resulting children I believe you can accomplish that now by using top level deduplication then tagging only children of the deduped top level items. Quote 4. Enhance production capabilities so they are more standard for eDiscovery. For example, for emails it is possible to not include standard meta-data fields in the image but it should be standard for eDiscovery to always show the same information. Perhaps you could elaborate on this point a bit as I'm not sure what your goal is here. Intella has a fairly strong customisation ability for loadfile creation already, and in fact I found it's just as extensive (if not better) than the other common tool used for processing data. I've found that eDiscovery can vary greatly from client to client as to what they would like to see, however you are correct that there are many data points which are standard across load files, even if the end client doesn't see them on the review side of things. I hope I have at least answered some of your questions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.