An Icelandic language model that reads a document and labels every item under the data protection act
Vör is an Icelandic language model that reads a document and labels every item of personal data under Act no. 90/2018. It is open on Hugging Face, with Norn v4.
AILast week I borrowed an Nvidia DGX Spark to test. Its GPU can reach all 121 GB of memory, which is enough to train a model with 31 billion parameters on a single desktop. I let it run for four days.
Two models came out of it, both built on Google's Gemma 4. Norn v4 is a general Icelandic model that inflects words correctly 86% of the time on a test drawn from the Database of Icelandic Morphology. The base model gets 70%. The other model is called Vör and does one thing. It reads Icelandic text and finds every piece of personal data in it.
Vör labels each item with its type and legal basis. A name and a kennitala are general personal data under article 3 of Act no. 90/2018. Health, union membership and religious belief are sensitive. Criminal records and financial data get their own classes. Finally it says whether the document as a whole is sensitive.
On 317 test documents Vör found 98.7% of all personal data and 99.7% of direct identifiers. I also tested names it never saw in training, and it found 324 of 327. It learned to recognise names rather than memorise them.
The test documents are synthetic, like all the data it learned from, and no real person appears in them. The next step is to check a hundred documents by hand and then test it on real ones. It is also weaker on single sentences than on full documents, and criminal records are the class it finds least often.
Both models are open on Hugging Face and run in Ollama on a machine with a large GPU (24 GB or more).
The name comes from the Prose Edda, where Vör is one of the goddesses. "She is wise and inquisitive, so that nothing can be hidden from her."

In a proposed human constitution for AI, Arif Jameel builds on my Palermo chapter and brings the augmentation gap into his article on the concentration of power.

If it is considered administrative malpractice to use Claude to judge the contribution of scholars, why is it considered "academic integrity" to use Turnitin to judge the originality of a student?

A recent incident in Iceland reveals dangerous flaws when AI like Claude assesses human contribution without understanding. AI is powerful but shouldn't judge careers. The article is based entirely on public media coverage and does not assume that all facts of the case are fully known.