Isolate a simulation assumption

Intent

I want to check a hypothesis without including it in a regulatory conclusion.

Correct formFrozen execution sceneBoundary

Wrong form and why it stays silent

Incorrect form

// origin assumed_for_simulation без mode simulation якобы принимается.

The origin of an assumption is accepted only in mode simulation; in compliance even a derived consequence does not arise.

Correct form

Arxo Law

language "law.core" version "0.2";
package recipes.d.r09 version "0.1.0";
namespace "urn:recipe:d-evidence:09";

entity Person;
relation hypothetical(p: Person);
relation eligible(p: Person);
assert hypothetical(entity_ref("urn:recipe:d-evidence:09:p")) { origin assumed_for_simulation; }
rule Consequence strict { for p: Person; when hypothetical(p); then eligible(p); }
case Experiment { context { mode simulation; } }

Frozen execution scene

In the table P and Q are different entities of the page, C is a case; full identifiers are pinned in the scenes.

Input on 13.09.2026 (a different date is named in the scene)	Question	Answer
explicit simulation	truth(eligible(P))	TRUE_ONLY / COMPUTED
regulatory mode	truth(eligible(P))	NEITHER / COMPUTED
default mode	truth(eligible(P))	NEITHER / COMPUTED
simulation without the assumption	truth(eligible(P))	NEITHER / COMPUTED

explicit simulation admits assumption

Arxo Law

test "explicit simulation admits assumption" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            timezone "UTC";
            mode simulation;
        }

    }
    evaluate truth(eligible(entity_ref("urn:recipe:d-evidence:09:p")));
    expect truth_status == TRUE_ONLY;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;

}

regulatory mode ignores assumption

Arxo Law

test "regulatory mode ignores assumption" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            timezone "UTC";
            mode compliance;
        }

    }
    evaluate truth(eligible(entity_ref("urn:recipe:d-evidence:09:p")));
    expect truth_status == NEITHER;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;
    expect issue(ASSERTION_NOT_ACCEPTED);
}

default mode ignores assumption

Arxo Law

test "default mode ignores assumption" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            timezone "UTC";
        }

    }
    evaluate truth(eligible(entity_ref("urn:recipe:d-evidence:09:p")));
    expect truth_status == NEITHER;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;
    expect issue(ASSERTION_NOT_ACCEPTED);
}

simulation without assumption fails

Arxo Law

test "simulation without assumption fails" {
    given {
        context {
            legal_time @2026-09-13;
            decision_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            knowledge_time @2026-09-13T09:00:00Z;
            timezone "UTC";
            mode simulation;
        }

    }
    evaluate truth(eligible(entity_ref("urn:recipe:d-evidence:09:p")));
    expect truth_status == NEITHER;
    expect evaluation_status == COMPUTED;

}

Counterfactual

Diagnostic mutation (lower-case) — LDC-E1353.

Original fragment:

Output

mode simulation;

Replacement:

Output

mode simulaton;

The paired scenes above pin the change of outcome.

Boundary

The mode enters the materialized context and manifest. Simulation does not bypass a policy-protected predicate. A simulation must not be issued as a compliance result; see Choose a mode for assumptions.

Pitfall

The origin of an assumption is accepted only in mode simulation; in compliance even a derived consequence does not arise.