Datasets:

---

SlayerLab

/

polish-dynaword

Like 25

Follow

Fabryka AI 89

Draft: Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS / KS — separate held source proposal

Not ready to merge/release. Independent of INFOS draft #119, based directly on main e0e1c2166bb7f8ffac2fc244cb26146b98db8f17; no dependency on its commits. Read/applied the linked AGENTS.md and required source-rights-review skill.

Implemented

• One zeszyty_prawnicze_bas registry entry, draft date 2026-10-14, release: None, SPDX NOASSERTION, rights status held_for_review.
• Datasheet, preliminary V/I rights evidence covering all 12 failure classes, provisional decision and findings-log addition.
• Offline article inventory from SHA256-pinned issue HTML. Records section, authors, title, pages, issue/article/PDF links; verifies matching article/PDF IDs. Changed/missing/empty/challenged/malformed inputs and duplicates fail. Pre-cutoff entries explicitly withheld; candidate dates never assign a licence.
• Inventory contracts plus an explicitly pending canonical-shard contract, QA record.
• No network/bypass client or own PII scrubber. No unverified Parquet, fabricated zero statistics or full-text corpus uploaded. No README/CHANGELOG/version/release/attributes/other-source changes.

Concrete origin and licence evidence

Planned direct source: Kancelaria Sejmu, Zeszyty Prawnicze official archive, series 1. Official PDFs use orka.sejm.gov.pl. No SpeakLeash/HF intermediary content snapshot planned.

Texts: Polish legal scholarly articles and expert/legislative opinions; add formal constitutional/legal argumentation distinct from studia_bas and parliamentary stenograms. Institutional/legal topic bias, references, quotations and complex PDF layouts require review. Preliminary scope 2(70)/2021 onward; 1(69)/2021 and earlier withheld. Earlier 20 issues/453 article candidates are not admitted-row statistics.

V: First-page article notice observed in Edyta Gapska, 4(88)2025, DOI 10.31268/ZPBAS.2025.82:

Artykuł został udostępniony na licencji Creative Commons – Uznanie Autorstwa 3.0 Polska (CC BY 3.0 PL).

The raw PDF was not retained; this is a transcript observation, not a complete pinned per-article grant. V: direct re-fetch on 2026-10-14 returned Human Verification HTML, not a PDF despite HTTP 200. Its hash is explicitly a blocked-response hash. No challenge solving is included in the committed implementation.

V: Full CC BY 3.0 PL legal code read/hashed: attribution/source/licence and change notices needed; section 5 disclaims title warranties. It is the licence template, not proof of the publisher's authority or ownership of quoted works.

I/unverified: author → publisher rights authority, complete journal/publisher terms (NC/ND/AI/TDM/scraping), all-article rights notices, reprinted/translated/quoted content scope. Not admitted; no automatic Art. 4 exemption for expert opinions and no Art. 29 quotation-right-as-licence claim.

Inline preliminary observation (NOT a canonical built-shard sample)

This is the observed article-title-page text, truncated. It shows legal register but is not one of the required three canonical training-data examples and does not certify cleaning or PII. No token counts are fabricated.

source: zeszyty_prawnicze_bas
status: held_for_review; raw title-page observation, not a released row
issue: 4(88)2025
printed_pages: 9–30
author: Edyta Gapska
doi: 10.31268/ZPBAS.2025.82
source_url: https://orka.sejm.gov.pl/wydbas.nsf/LiczOpen?OpenAgent&055F88C940DC7C59C1258E20002EB4A8&lang=PL
observed_article_notice: CC BY 3.0 PL (page 1)
token_count: not computed for a canonical row

Wniosek oczywiście bezzasadny jako przejaw nadużycia prawa
w postępowaniu nieprocesowym. Uwagi na tle postanowienia
Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 18 kwietnia 2024 r., sygn. akt
I CSK 695/23, OSNC 2024, nr 10, poz. 106 […]

Spaces displayed for readability; not claimed as a verbatim canonical row. Typical article and opinion body samples must come from the real built shard later using src/render_sample.py; real before/after normalization examples are also missing.

Duplicate conclusion corrected

Earlier title/URL and selected-phrase searches identified no BAS duplicate, not proof of zero duplicates across all candidate/target texts. The previous conversational blanket zero-duplicate statement is withdrawn. Legal opinions can be republished/quoted; same statute in a title is not a duplicate criterion. Full pinned normalized exact/near/containment and article/full-issue overlap decisions remain necessary.

Tests

• python -m pytest src/test_zeszyty_prawnicze_bas_contract.py -q: 27 passed, 1 explicitly skipped (unbuilt canonical shard).
• Full python -m pytest src/ -q: 815 passed, 147 failed, 18 errors, 27 skipped; NOT green.
• Same-materialization baseline: 787 passed, 147 failed, 18 errors, 26 skipped. Failure/error nodeid sets identical, no new failed/error nodeids. Many existing tests encounter LFS pointers; unrelated fixes not bundled.

Blockers before ready-for-review

• Accessible full publisher terms and all article/issue rights notices with archive/hash pins; no access-challenge bypass.
• Separately reviewed shared fail-closed rights parsing in src/rights.py, then actual ingestion wired to it, rejecting unknown/changed/restrictive grants.
• Third-party stratification by articles vs opinions and other sections. Planned seed 20261014, >=40 docs per stratum (or documented complete smaller stratum), saved IDs/classifications, Wilson 95% intervals and token/char shares. Current result: not sampled, not zero.
• Reproducible PDF extraction, Unicode/wrap normalization and frequency-based boilerplate policy; preserve substantive legal numbering, show real before/after.
• Complete all-shard exact/near/containment audit, prevent article/full-issue duplication.
• Pinned external SlayerLab/NERGAL pass, normalized .jsonl.zst, canonical build_dynaword.py Parquet, real stats/attribution/rights and passing canonical contracts.
• Three inline canonical examples, including typical scholarly article and legal opinion prose.
• Validate/move provisional decision into sibling polish-dynaword-v2 repository; schema/checkout absent here.
• Maintainer rights and acceptable residual-share decisions. Not legal advice.

Provisional decision (also stored under this source)

source_id: zeszyty_prawnicze_bas
status: held_for_review
scope:
  release: null
  artifact_revision: null
  withheld: []
evidence:
  upstream_url: https://zpbas.sejm.gov.pl/Journal.nsf/pubBAS.xsp?view=12&seria=1&lang=PL
  license_evidence:
    - "V: CC BY 3.0 PL observed on first page of Edyta Gapska article, 4(88)2025; raw PDF not retained."
    - "V: Latest direct re-fetch returned Human Verification HTML, not a PDF."
    - "I: 2(70)/2021 cutoff needs complete pinned per-article verification."
  provenance_evidence:
    - "I: Planned direct publisher acquisition; author-to-publisher authority and scope over quoted works unverified."
decision:
  date: "2026-10-14"
  rationale: "Hold; inventory/review draft only, no corpus admission or release."
  supersedes: null
verification:
  artifact_sha256: null
  notes: "Full publisher terms, per-item pins, stratified third-party sample, text overlap, NERGAL/build and sibling decision-schema validation not completed."

Review preparation (2026-10-14)

The new zeszyty_prawnicze_bas.review-plan.md records population coverage,
article/opinion strata, annotation fields, per-stratum Wilson reporting,
population-weighted estimates and full exact/near/containment overlap gates.
The offline preparer accepts --strata plus --review-plan, uses seed 20261014
and stable SHA256 ranking, and selects 40 per stratum or all of a smaller group.
Unknown/unmapped sections stop the run. Population counts, census flags and
inventory hashes accompany selected IDs. All classifications and measurements
start null. No real sample has been selected without acquired archive inputs.

Current validation: 34 focused tests passed, 1 canonical-shard test skipped.
Python 3.14 full suite with a writable workspace basetemp: 787 passed, 184 failed,
34 errors, 27 skipped. This is not directly comparable to the earlier baseline
above; the full suite is not green. Earlier validation counts describe the
initial draft. The current failure/error nodeid sets match the current INFOS
run, but that comparison is not a main-baseline regression certification.

The publisher homepage still returned Human Verification through the web tool.
No challenge was solved, no new PDF/grant obtained, and all rights, normalization,
overlap, NERGAL and canonical-build blockers remain. release: None; held draft.