The share of documents in a population that are actually responsive.
Why it matters: Low richness changes sample sizes, expectations, and review cost.
Vocabulary
Use this as a fast reference for common terms that often get conflated in stakeholder discussions.
Reference cardsMaster these core TAR concepts to communicate more clearly with stakeholders. Click a card to reveal its definition.
The share of documents in a population that are actually responsive.
Why it matters: Low richness changes sample sizes, expectations, and review cost.
A sample-based estimate of what responsive material may remain in the unreviewed set.
Why it matters: It informs stopping decisions but never proves a perfect review.
A fixed reference sample used to compare workflow behavior over time.
Why it matters: Helpful in some workflows, but weak design can mislead.
The share of truly responsive documents that were found by the workflow.
Why it matters: Often the headline metric in defensibility discussions.
The share of documents marked responsive that were actually responsive.
Why it matters: It affects cost and reviewer burden more than completeness.
The uncertainty introduced when a conclusion is based on a sample instead of the full population.
Why it matters: It is the reason confidence intervals exist.