Parallel official-language review
Place corresponding legal expressions beside one another—with evidence.
LawVM aligns independently derived language-expression states, exposes missing or ambiguous structural counterparts, and routes selected citations, identifiers, dates, symbols, and quantities for review.
For publishers, ministries, and bilingual legal teams
Separate four questions before drawing a conclusion.
Expression state
Each language has its own source, checkpoint, state root, coverage, and residuals. No expression is treated as controlling by default.
Structural pairing
Corresponding chapters, sections, subsections, items, and other units may be exact, one-sided, split/merged, ambiguous, or unpaired.
Parallel QA
Named profiles compare typed facts such as citations, identifiers, dates, symbols, or quantities where the check is appropriate.
Human review
Bilingual legal reviewers disposition candidates, identify legitimate translation shape, and decide what requires institutional action.
Review surface
Neutral text first; findings on demand.
Finnish expression
Swedish expression
Current and incoming lanes
Begin with FI/SV; preserve a multi-expression model.
Finland: Finnish and Swedish
The FI/SV lane inventories source pairs, addresses, amendment chains, checkpoints, selected citation facts, and explicit pairing residuals.
Switzerland: German, French, and Italian
The staging Fedlex lane records multilingual Work–Expression–Manifestation relationships and source-completeness accounts for a bounded federal tranche. Replay is not yet claimed.
European Union
Each EU expression group may contain any number of languages; the first viewer can still use a two-pane layout while the underlying account remains multi-language.
Local legal review
The institutional output is a concise queue of exact structural or invariant-fact observations, rather than a noisy word-by-word translation diff.
First bounded pilot
One domain, every required expression.
Inputs
All authoritative language manifestations, amendment sources, checkpoints, effective dates, identifiers, and a bilingual legal reviewer.
Outputs
Expression inventory, structural alignment account, invariant-fact findings, unpaired units, exact provenance, and review dispositions.
Review authority
Bilingual legal reviewers decide semantic equivalence, controlling-language questions, and any action following a comparison result.
First scope
A source-complete transition corpus in one legal domain, with a deliberately narrow and versioned check profile.