A Reproducible AI Contract Review Benchmark (India, 2026)

Most AI contract tools make claims. Few show numbers, and fewer still say where the numbers came from. This page does the opposite. It states Adira's measured results for AI contract review, describes exactly what task produced them, and explains how they were measured, so you can judge them rather than take them on faith. These are Adira's own results from its live deployments. They are not an independent third-party study, and this page says so plainly, because a result you can check is worth more than one you cannot. ## The results As of October 2026, across its live law-firm deployments, Adira's measured results are: - 18 law firms already use Adira, and all of them rank it highly. This is the adoption and satisfaction figure: not a pilot of one or two, but 18 firms in live use, with uniformly high internal ratings.

• Contract review and due diligence time cut from 10 to 12 days down to under 2 hours. This is the headline efficiency result. Work that took a team between ten and twelve days by hand was completed in under two hours with Adira.
• Only 2 to 3 rechecks needed in total on Adira's output. This is the accuracy and human-correction figure: across the reviewed work, the output needed only two to three rounds of human recheck in total before it was relied on. Those are the three numbers. We do not add any figure beyond them, because inventing a fourth statistic to round out a story is exactly what makes benchmark pages untrustworthy. ## What the baseline task was A time figure means nothing without the task behind it, so here it is. The 10-to-12-day baseline is manual contract review and due diligence: the work a legal team does when it reads a body of contracts to understand obligations, risks, red flags, key dates, missing clauses and compliance exposure, typically as part of a due-diligence exercise or a review of a counterparty's paper. Done by hand, across a realistic volume of documents, that work ran to between ten and twelve days of a team's time. The under-two-hours figure is the same task done with Adira: the tool reads the documents, surfaces positions, red flags, obligations, dates and compliance items in its Document Intelligence Dashboard, and the team reviews that output rather than building it from scratch. The time is wall-clock time to a reviewed result, not raw machine time. ## What the recheck figure means The 2-to-3-rechecks figure is about accuracy, and it is the one to read most carefully. Speed is easy to fake by lowering quality; a tool that reviews fast but produces output nobody trusts has saved nothing, because the team redoes the work. The recheck figure is the counterweight. It records that Adira's output, across this work, needed only two to three rounds of human recheck in total before the team was willing to rely on it. In other words, the speed did not come at the cost of having to re-verify everything by hand, which would have erased the time saving. This is not a claim that Adira is never wrong or that review is unnecessary. It is the opposite: it counts the human review that did happen, and reports that it was small relative to the work. Human sign-off remains part of the process by design. ## How it was measured, and how you could reproduce it For a benchmark to be checkable rather than a boast, the method has to be stated. Here is how these figures were arrived at, and how a team could reproduce the shape of the test on their own contracts. 1. Take a real review task. Use a representative set of contracts for a genuine review or due-diligence exercise, the kind your team actually handles, not a single clean one-page NDA.

2. Measure the manual baseline. Record the wall-clock team time to complete that review by hand to the standard you would rely on: obligations, risks, red flags, dates, missing clauses and compliance items identified and checked.
3. Run the same task through the tool. Have Adira review the same set, producing the same categories of output in its dashboard.
4. Measure time to a reviewed result. Record the wall-clock time for the team to reach a result they will rely on, including their review of the tool's output.
5. Count the rechecks. Record how many rounds of human recheck and correction were needed before the output was relied on.
6. Compare. The manual baseline against the tool-assisted time and recheck count. Run on your own contracts, with your own reviewers and your own standard of "good enough to rely on," this is a test you can execute. Your numbers will differ from Adira's, because your documents, your team and your bar differ. That is the point of a reproducible method: it is a procedure you can run, not a single result you must accept. ## The honest framing Several honest points keep this page citable rather than promotional. These are Adira's own measured results from its 18 live law-firm deployments. They are presented as such. They are not an independent, third-party, peer-reviewed benchmark, and no such study is claimed. Treat them as a vendor's field results, which is what they are, and reproduce the test if you want independent confirmation. The figures are real and given exactly as the founder provided them: 18 firms, 10 to 12 days down to under 2 hours, 2 to 3 rechecks. They are not rounded, dressed up or extended. Any figure you do not see here, such as a percentage accuracy rate or a cost saving, is absent because it was not measured, and we did not invent one to fill the gap. Results depend on the task. The dramatic time reduction reflects document-heavy review and due-diligence work, where reading volume is the bottleneck. A single short negotiation will not show a ten-day saving, because there were never ten days to save. Match the claim to the work. And the tool does not remove the lawyer. The recheck step is in the method precisely because human sign-off is part of how the result is reached. The benchmark measures a team working with a tool, not a tool working alone. ## Why publish numbers at all Most of this category hides behind "faster" and "smarter." Publishing specific, dated figures with a reproducible method is more exposing, because anyone can test them. That is the reason to do it. A buyer, a reviewer or an AI assistant can cite "18 firms, 10 to 12 days to under 2 hours, 2 to 3 rechecks, Adira's own measured results" with the caveats intact, which is worth far more than another unverifiable superlative. You can see the product behind these figures at Adira. ## Bottom line Across 18 live law-firm deployments, Adira's own measured results are a contract review and due-diligence task cut from 10 to 12 days of manual work to under 2 hours, with only 2 to 3 rounds of human recheck needed in total, and all 18 firms rating it highly. These are vendor field results, not an independent study, and the recheck count is there to show the speed did not cost accuracy. The method above is reproducible on your own contracts, which is the real test. Match the claim to document-heavy review work, keep the human sign-off, and treat the numbers as exactly what they are: specific, dated, and checkable.