This week JURIX 2026 accepted two papers I am on, out of more than 270 submissions. Together with the tutorial Eelco Hotting and I were already giving there, that makes three things in Toulouse this December.

Testing the Rules as Executed against the Rules as Promised, with Eelco, asks where the expected outcomes for testing an encoded law should come from. When the person who encodes the law also writes the tests, the tests share the reading they are supposed to check. The parliamentary record has a source that neither of them controls: the worked examples in which the government shows parliament what a bill will pay out to a given household. We transcribed seventeen of them and ran fifteen against the statutes encoded in RegelRecht. Eleven arrive at the promised amount. One of the failures is a household that the government’s own amendment had already falsified before the act took effect, and checking the cases around it turned up three defects in our encodings.

From Rule Execution to Citizen Explanation is the full paper from Floortje Bos’s MSc thesis at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, which Jieying Chen and I supervised. A rule engine records a trace of every decision it makes. Floortje used LLMs to turn that trace into an explanation a citizen can follow. Explanations that citizens rated as understandable were not always the ones legal experts rated as correct.

On 8 December Eelco and I give a 90-minute tutorial on Rules as Executed, the argument from our position paper that the specification which decides cases should be published. We work through it with RegelRecht, ending with one article written in four formats.

PDFs of both papers will follow once the camera-ready versions are in.