Project status
Beta-stage engineering, bounded assurance
What is operational, what remains pre-1.0, and what practical reliance requires.
- Engineering maturity
- Beta-stage: substantial end-to-end capability exists and is suitable for bounded institutional evaluation and integration work.
- Release compatibility
- Pre-1.0: Python imports, CLI/JSON schemas, evidence and certificate formats, and some frontend contracts may still break.
- Assurance maturity
- Profile-specific: each source, operation family, frontend, corpus, and check keeps its own claim ceiling. Legal authority and broader correctness require separate institutional and evidential support.
An August 2026 Finnish replay run reported 0.23% mean normalized text edit distance against its declared Finlex comparison surface. Source review and residual classification carry the correctness questions.
What is established
- For declared Finnish source/profile scopes, covered recurring amendment forms can be compiled into typed, inspectable text-state transitions.
- The maintained workflow carries point-in-time trees, operation provenance, mutation accounting, findings, and comparison residuals together.
- Different source regimes can reuse a shared core while keeping jurisdiction-specific acquisition, drafting idioms, and source pathology local.
- One Estonia finding has completed the loop from replay divergence to official-publisher confirmation and correction.
Open assurance work
- Jurisdiction claims remain tied to a declared source, profile, operation family, corpus, and checker.
- Frontend maturity is uneven; source acquisition, effect parsing, dry-run evidence, replay, PIT state, and public artifacts must be assessed independently.
- Stable compatibility requires a pre-1.0 release decision for the Python API, CLI JSON families, certificate bundle, and long-term service interface.
- Exact reproduction requires named software, sources, corpus, configuration, and output package rather than a moving development checkout.
Portfolio
Finland remains the reference replay frontend. Estonia, the UK, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, EU, and US federal lanes exercise other authority and source models in mainline. Japan, South Korea, Poland, and Switzerland are active staging frontends not yet integrated into mainline.
Compare jurisdiction status and claim ceilings.
How to evaluate it
Institutions can begin with a bounded no-write pilot. Technical evaluators can use the current command paths. Contributors and maintainers can use the work-package map.
Public evidence discipline
Stable claims should name their source and software snapshots, command, corpus, comparison role, residual account, and date. Publisher divergences remain candidates until disposition. Scores guide regression review; source evidence supports correctness decisions.
Contact and repository
The code is published under the MIT license. [email protected] · github.com/eliask/lawvm