AI detection for law firms

AI detection should be treated as a probabilistic signal, not dispositive proof. It is best used as a due-diligence and risk-flagging tool that informs human review. In practice, firms rely on detection results to identify passages requiring closer scrutiny by a qualified attorney or expert witness rather than as standalone evidence.

No. Documents are processed ephemerally and are not retained, indexed, or reused. Content is never used for model training or shared across customers. This design supports confidentiality obligations, trade-secret protection, and privilege preservation common in legal practice.

Yes. Pangram identifies AI-assisted authorship, not just fully generated text. This allows firms to distinguish between entirely AI-drafted sections, AI-generated drafts that were subsequently edited by a human, and fully human-authored content. This is particularly useful for validating pleadings, contracts, and memoranda that may have originated from generative tools but were refined during legal review.

Legal writing presents unique challenges due to its formal tone, structured syntax, and precedent-based language. Pangram is tuned to reduce false positives caused by boilerplate clauses, statutory language, and citation-heavy sections. Results are delivered with granular confidence signals so attorneys can apply professional judgment rather than relying on binary labels.

Yes. Many firms use AI detection as part of internal review workflows to validate junior associate drafts, ensure compliance with firm AI-use policies, review filings before submission, and audit vendor- or contractor-produced legal content. This supports consistent standards without restricting legitimate productivity tools. Engineering teams use similar workflows — see our AI code detection for developers.

Yes. Pangram's processing model is designed to minimize data exposure, avoid persistent storage, and prevent cross-document learning. This aligns with common interpretations of confidentiality obligations under professional conduct rules, though firms should always review usage under their own risk framework.

Yes. Pangram offers API access that can be integrated into document management systems (DMS), contract lifecycle management (CLM) platforms, internal review tools, or custom workflows. This allows detection to occur before filing, execution, or client delivery, rather than as an after-the-fact audit.

No. AI detection is a decision-support tool, not a substitute for legal judgment. Its value lies in surfacing risk signals efficiently so attorneys can focus attention where it matters most — similar to how e-discovery, contract analytics, and citation checkers are used today.