The review problem
Lawtionary is a team prototype for Indonesian legal-draft review and source-backed terminology lookup. The application is designed as a local-first macOS workflow where a reviewer can inspect the evidence behind a suggestion.
My contribution
I worked directly on the application logic, legal-language data collection and preparation, AI/ML components, and local model integration. I also contributed to the discussions that shaped how the AI component should fit into the document-review workflow.
Keeping suggestions grounded
The application keeps two concerns distinct: dictionary lookup and contextual suggestion. Candidate retrieval is followed by structured outputs and evidence validation, with human review controls remaining in the flow. The prototype uses Swift, SwiftUI, AppKit, retrieval-augmented generation patterns, and local MLX/Qwen integration.
Prototype boundary
The result is a local macOS prototype that connects document review, terminology data, candidate retrieval, and local model output. It is a research and product prototype, not an autonomous legal advisor. It does not replace a lawyer’s judgment, and unsupported terms or suggestions should remain reviewable rather than being invented or silently rewritten.
What I learned
The project taught me to treat evidence and user control as part of the product architecture. A model output is only useful when the surrounding system makes its origin, confidence, and limits understandable.
How it works
A simplified view of the project. Select a stage for details.
SwiftUI and AppKit
A reviewer works with an Indonesian legal draft in a local macOS application.
Grounded candidates
Dictionary lookup and contextual suggestion remain separate. Retrieval supplies source-backed terminology candidates.
Local model and validation
Structured model output is checked against evidence before being presented for review.
Human decision
The reviewer inspects the evidence and decides what to use. The application does not autonomously rewrite legal advice.