agent classified the limitation-of-liability clause as indemnity - the summary filed the cap under the wrong clause...

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

The agent filed a limitation-of-liability clause under indemnity. The two are different: limitation caps damages ('in no event shall liability exceed'), indemnity shifts them ('shall indemnify and hold harmless'). Give the classifier distinguishing tests on the operative verbs, reclassify, and add the pair as a regression example.

The symptom

agent classified the limitation-of-liability clause as indemnity  -  the summary filed the cap under the wrong clause type

Steps

1. Apply the distinguishing test

Limitation: caps or excludes damages (exceed, cap, maximum, consequential). Indemnity: shifts liability to another party (indemnify, hold harmless, defend). The clause caps damages: it is limitation. Expected: Correct classification by operative language.

2. Re-file the clause

Move the summary entry from indemnity to limitation of liability. Expected: The clause under its correct type.

3. Check for the reverse error

Scan the indemnity bucket for limitation language and vice versa; misclassification often runs both ways. Expected: Both buckets clean.

4. Add the pair as a regression example

Feed this clause and a true indemnity clause to the classifier as labeled examples so the distinction sticks. Expected: Future classifications separate the two reliably.

When to use

• A clause sits under the wrong type heading
• Limitation and indemnity buckets look mixed
• The classifier was trained on heading text, not operative verbs

When not to use

• The clause genuinely does both (file under both, note the overlap)
• The clause type is ambiguous (escalate rather than guess)
• The classification came from a human (fix the source guidance)

Why it happens

Both clause types live near each other and talk about liability, so surface similarity fools classifiers keyed on topic words. The operative verbs differ sharply (cap vs indemnify), but a classifier reading 'liability' and 'damages' in both never learns the distinction.

Edge cases

• Mutual indemnities with caps: classify each operative part separately.
• Carve-outs from the cap (IP, confidentiality): keep them attached to the limitation entry.
• Insurance provisions nearby: a third bucket that also mentions liability.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_VMSnd52RKWRmdOL2IGc8nw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_VMSnd52RKWRmdOL2IGc8nw

Thread query: agent classified the limitation-of-liability clause as indemnity - the summary filed the cap under the wrong clause type

TL;DR: The agent filed a limitation-of-liability clause under indemnity. The two are different: limitation caps damages ('in no event shall liability exceed'), indemnity shifts them ('shall indemnify and hold harmless'). Give the classifier distinguishing tests on the operative verbs, reclassify, and add the pair as a regression example.