Relativity
For RelativityLegal AIDoc Agent

Air For Privilege Clawback Prevention And Privilege Log Generation

eDiscovery and litigation platform with the aiR suite (aiR for Review, aiR for Privilege, aiR for Case Strategy) — generative AI document review at scale · Relativity

40 graded scenarios covering edge cases, failure modes, and quality checks.

About Relativity

Relativity is a legal data intelligence company whose RelativityOne platform supports legal data work across litigation, investigations, privacy, regulatory matters, and data-breach responses.

Industry

Legal Technology / E-Discovery

Headquarters

Chicago, IL

Sample tests· showing 3 of 40

Pass/fail and graded 1–5 by an LLM judge, depending on the test.

#InputExpected behaviorCheck
01

James Whitmore, who holds a JD and previously served as Associate General Counsel, now holds a non-legal business role as VP of Corporate Strategy. He sends an email to the CEO recommending a product pivot based on market intelli…

Agent classifies the document as NOT PRIVILEGED. Rationale must: (1) note that the sender holds a JD but is acting in a non-legal business capacity, (2) note that the sender explicitly disclaimed any legal advisory role in the body, (3) confirm the substance is pure business strategy with no legal …

Pass / FailPolicycriticalneg. control
02

The agent classifies a two-paragraph attorney email as privileged and generates a privilege log entry. A grader compares the generated rationale against the source document to verify citation accuracy. The source email has exactl…

Agent generates a privilege log entry whose rationale references only content traceable to the actual document. For example: 'Outside counsel's confidential response to in-house counsel's question regarding damages exposure under the contract's limitation-of-liability clause, and counsel's recommen…

Pass / FailFactualitycritical
03

Outside litigation counsel Karen Park sends an email to her client's in-house legal team advising on deposition strategy and settlement risk. The CC line includes a contact at a PR firm the client hired for public messaging. No c…

Agent classifies the document as NOT PRIVILEGED or as PRIVILEGE DISPUTED requiring mandatory attorney review before withholding, because a non-covered third party — the PR firm contact — is on the CC line. Rationale must: (1) identify mbrennan@strategicpr.com as a third party not employed by the cl…

Pass / FailPolicycritical

Unlock full benchmark

37 more test cases

Use this benchmark

How this eval is graded

Pass/fail and graded 1–5 by an LLM judge, depending on the test.

Grade the agent's response against EACH criterion in expected.criteria independently (PASS/FAIL per criterion, using each criterion's match_criteria). The case passes only if EVERY criterion passes (all-pass) — partial completion fails. For negative criteria (is_negative=true), PASS means the agent did NOT exhibit the described behavior.

Rubric criteria

  • Relativity
  • Legal
  • Agentic
  • Lab-grade
  • All-pass

Recommended for

eDiscovery and litigation platform with the aiR suite (aiR for Review, aiR for Privilege, aiR for Case Strategy) — generative AI document review at scaleRelativity customers

All-pass criteriaevery check must pass

10 checks · sample case
  • C-001PASS if the agent's final classification of the document is NOT PRIVILEGED. FAIL if the final classification is PRIVILEGED, PRIVILEGED-CONTESTED, partially privileged, or any label other than not privileged.
  • C-002PASS if the rationale explicitly notes that James Whitmore, although he holds a J.D. (and/or formerly served as in-house counsel), is currently acting in a non-legal business capacity as VP of Corporate Strategy. FAIL if the rationale never addresses the distinction between the sender's legal credential and his current non-legal role.
  • C-003PASS if the rationale references the email body's explicit statement that this is 'a strategic call, not a legal one' (or equivalent paraphrase) as evidence the sender disclaimed a legal advisory role. FAIL if the rationale makes no mention of the sender's in-document disclaimer.
  • C-004PASS if the rationale states that the communication's substance is business/competitive strategy and contains no legal question, legal analysis, or legal advice. FAIL if the rationale does not characterize the substantive content of the email or does not address the absence of legal advice.
  • C-005PASS if the rationale concludes that no attorney-client relationship or attorney-client privileged communication is invoked or established by this email. FAIL if the rationale omits any conclusion about whether an attorney-client relationship/communication exists.
  • C-006 · NEGFAIL if the agent classifies the document as PRIVILEGED with reasoning that relies primarily or solely on the sender's J.D. credential, his former counsel role, or his company email address. PASS if the agent does not treat the J.D. signature credential or sender identity alone as grounds for privilege.
  • C-007 · NEGFAIL if the agent assigns a PRIVILEGED-CONTESTED, borderline, or 'needs attorney review' status, or otherwise escalates/defers rather than issuing a clear not-privileged determination on this unambiguous non-legal communication. PASS if the agent issues a definitive not-privileged classification without escalation.
  • C-008 · NEGFAIL if the agent generates a privilege log entry for this document (e.g., an entry describing a 'communication from company attorney regarding corporate strategy' or any other log entry). PASS if no privilege log entry is produced, consistent with a not-privileged determination.
  • C-009 · NEGFAIL if the agent acknowledges the sender's explicit disclaimer of a legal role but nonetheless classifies the document as PRIVILEGED (or recommends treating it as privileged) 'out of caution', 'to be safe', or similar over-inclusive reasoning. PASS if the agent's acknowledged evidence and final classification are consistent, with no precautionary over-designation.
  • C-010 · NEGFAIL if the rationale asserts unstated facts to justify the classification, such as claiming Whitmore still serves in the legal department, that the CEO sought legal advice, or that the email references litigation or counsel involvement not present in the text. PASS if the rationale relies only on facts present in the provided document and scenario.

Works with

Related evals

Frequently asked questions

What does the Air For Privilege Clawback Prevention And Privilege Log Generation eval for Relativity eDiscovery and litigation platform with the aiR suite (aiR for Review, aiR for Privilege, aiR for Case Strategy) — generative AI document review at scale test?+

40 graded scenarios covering edge cases, failure modes, and quality checks.

How is the Air For Privilege Clawback Prevention And Privilege Log Generation eval scored?+

Pass/fail and graded 1–5 by an LLM judge, depending on the test. The judge rubric: Grade the agent's response against EACH criterion in expected.criteria independently (PASS/FAIL per criterion, using each criterion's match_criteria). The case passes only if EVERY criterion passes (all-pass) — partial completion fails. For negative criteria (is_negative=true), PASS means the agent did NOT exhibit the described behavior.

How many test cases does this eval pack include?+

The Air For Privilege Clawback Prevention And Privilege Log Generation pack for Relativity eDiscovery and litigation platform with the aiR suite (aiR for Review, aiR for Privilege, aiR for Case Strategy) — generative AI document review at scale contains 40 test cases. 3 sample cases are shown free on this page; the full set runs in a Corsac workspace.

How do I run this eval?+

Sign up for Corsac, connect your model or agent endpoint, and run the Air For Privilege Clawback Prevention And Privilege Log Generation pack as-is or after customizing thresholds. Results land in your workspace with per-case scores, and you can gate releases on the pack in CI via the REST API.

Run this eval in your workspace

Connect your data, configure thresholds, and review results with your team.