<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>OpenLegalCore Articles</title>
<link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/</link>
<description>Open-source, traceable and human-verifiable infrastructure for legal AI.</description>
<language>en</language>
<atom:link href="https://openlegalcore.org/articles/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<item><title>Legal RAG Can Fail Before the Model Answers</title><link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/legal-rag-can-fail-before-the-model-answers/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openlegalcore.org/articles/legal-rag-can-fail-before-the-model-answers/</guid><pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>A genuine provision can still support the wrong answer. This article shows how collection scope, document splitting, filters and ranking determine which sources a legal AI model ever sees.</description><dc:creator>Rajko Majcen</dc:creator></item>
<item><title>When a Correct Citation Leads to the Wrong Law</title><link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/when-a-correct-citation-leads-to-the-wrong-law/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openlegalcore.org/articles/when-a-correct-citation-leads-to-the-wrong-law/</guid><pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>A genuine provision and an official link do not prove that the right law was applied. This article explains why legal AI must preserve temporal versions, transitional rules and the source-selection path.</description><dc:creator>Rajko Majcen</dc:creator></item>
<item><title>An Audit Trail Is Not a Log: What a Digital Legal Process Must Preserve</title><link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/audit-trail-is-not-a-log/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openlegalcore.org/articles/audit-trail-is-not-a-log/</guid><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>An audit trail is useful when it permits a reasonable reconstruction of the particular process while remaining purpose-bound, appropriately protected and subject to retention rules.</description><dc:creator>Rajko Majcen</dc:creator></item>
<item><title>Article 86 of the AI Act: Does the right to explanation already apply to Annex III systems?</title><link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/article-86-right-to-explanation/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openlegalcore.org/articles/article-86-right-to-explanation/</guid><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>The legal question remains open. The technical capacity to provide an intelligible explanation should not.</description><dc:creator>Rajko Majcen</dc:creator></item>
<item><title>A Result Is Not a Method: Why Visible Methods Matter in Legal AI</title><link>https://openlegalcore.org/articles/result-is-not-a-method/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://openlegalcore.org/articles/result-is-not-a-method/</guid><pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><description>Why legal AI needs inspectable sources, provenance and human review: a legal and technical analysis of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act and GDPR.</description><dc:creator>Rajko Majcen</dc:creator></item>
</channel>
</rss>
