Contract data extraction calibration service

Buy automation based on meaningful task accuracy

Confirm the buyer's problem and scope, collect authorized redacted contracts and lawyer-labeled answers, then follow this sequence: 1. Build representative evaluation sets. 2. Measure field-level errors. 3. Compare reviewer-assisted workflows. Resolve uncertain cases with qualified reviewers, approve counsel-reviewed extraction evaluation, and measure reviewer time per correct field and material error rate against a documented baseline.

How the AI works

Use AI to interpret permitted inputs, suggest structured mappings and generate candidate outputs for the three stated task modules. Use deterministic code for arithmetic, schema validation, hard constraints and reproducible tests. Review source-linked explanations and uncertainty before accepting results. No unsupported model accuracy claims; rights-cleared evaluation only. A model suggestion is never a verified fact, professional decision or authorization to act.

Safeguards

Preserve matter confidentiality, access boundaries and original evidence. Qualified professionals review legal interpretations and final client documents. No unsupported model accuracy claims; rights-cleared evaluation only. Keep all consequential actions under authorized human control and do not fabricate missing inputs, permissions, professional judgments or market evidence.

What to build first

Pilot scope: No unsupported model accuracy claims; rights-cleared evaluation only. Implement one approved input format, a bounded representative case set and the first two task modules: build representative evaluation sets; measure field-level errors. Support the third module with operator review: compare reviewer-assisted workflows. Include source references, corrections, basic organization access, approval states, export and value measurement. Use managed operator assistance for unresolved exceptions. The cost estimate covers this narrow prototype, not unrestricted multi-tenant scale, complex production integrations, specialist certification or physical operations.

What it can connect to

Authorized matter files, firm templates and approved legal knowledge collections. Permitted research libraries, interview recording imports, citation exports and document editors. Preserve original source metadata throughout the workflow. Start with authorized file exchange. Validate current provider access, usage rights and schema behavior before promising a connector.

The screens in detail

Primary screens: Research question and consent, Evidence comparison, Reviewed findings and experiment. Organize work by research question. Show a source library, an evidence matrix and a draft findings panel with linked quotations. Keep contradictory findings and unanswered questions visible. Allow reviewers to inspect the original context before accepting an interpretation. Make the task-specific outcome counsel-reviewed extraction evaluation visible beside its evidence, review state and value baseline.