Skip to main content
Praxikon

Explorer

Why this object hangs off that object

Every object in this graph has its own address and can be cited on its own. This page shows which objects exist and, once you open one, why it hangs off another: from which source with its locator, through which condition or exception, to which consequence.

Since the last release an obligation states separately who carries the duty and who is merely affected. Filter by duty holder and you get the duties resting on a role; filter by actor and you get everything that is about that role. That difference is visible on purpose.

This is the knowledge layer under the four levels of the assessment. See the four levels.

Filters

Only dimensions the data carries. A dimension without values is absent rather than empty.

Eleven types, including evidence, control and standard.

Is about this role. Walks the role hierarchy upward.

The duty rests on this role, not merely: it is about it.

The article route this object hangs off.

Free slugs, not a taxonomy with objects of its own.

The phase of the object, not its quality.

Whether this object carries a source line of its own.

Searches label, summary, topics, conditions and statement texts. The ordering is the same heuristic as the search API; build on the identifiers, not on the ranking.

Time

Two axes. Legal time is what applied; knowledge time is what we had published by then. Leaving them empty means the default of this release.

Clear all

Objects

19 objects in this selection.

  1. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Article 6 and Annex III classification record

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:annex-iii-classification-record

    Traceable rationale covering intended purpose, Annex III category, Article 6(3) assessment and registration decision.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk

  2. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Data governance file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-10-data-governance-record

    Record per dataset of origin, choices, assumptions, bias examination and mitigations.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  3. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    Technical file (Annex IV)

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-11-technical-documentation-record

    Technical documentation kept current per system version, ready for a supervisor’s request.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  4. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Logs and retention regime

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-12-logging-record

    Log files with a retention period appropriate to the purpose and at least six months for deployers (Articles 19 and 26).

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  5. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Instructions and interpretation file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-13-instructions-record

    The received instructions for use plus their internal translation into work instructions per role.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  6. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Oversight file per system

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-14-human-oversight-record

    Record of oversight measures, appointed persons, their training and the moments of intervention.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  7. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    Performance and security file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-15-accuracy-robustness-record

    Declared accuracy levels, test results, and measures against data poisoning and adversarial attacks among others.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  8. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    QMS documentation

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-17-quality-management-record

    The documented quality system with procedures, role assignment and references to the underlying files.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  9. Evidencev1.0.04 relations

    AI literacy measures record

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-4-measures-record

    Versioned record of roles, context, measures, participation or instruction and review moments.

    Hangs off: Article 4: AI literacy

    Editorially reviewed | ai-literacy, evidence

  10. Evidencev1.0.04 relations

    Article 5 screening record

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-5-screening-record

    A record per system that the Article 5 screening was performed, with outcome and reasoning. The conclusion "no prohibited practice" is evidence too.

    Hangs off: Article 5: prohibited practices

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, prohibited-practices

  11. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Transparency implementation record

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-50-implementation-record

    Record of scenario, actor, disclosure or marking, technical implementation, test and owner.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, transparency

  12. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    Systemic-risk file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-55-gpai-systemic-risk-record

    Evaluation results, risk assessments, mitigations, incident reports and security measures per model version.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, gpai-systemic-risk

  13. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Monitoring plan and reports

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-72-post-market-monitoring-record

    The plan as part of the technical documentation plus the periodic analyses and follow-up actions.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, post-market

  14. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Incident register and reports

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-73-incident-reporting-record

    Record of incidents, analyses, reports to supervisors and corrective measures.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, post-market

  15. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    Risk management file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:article-9-risk-management-record

    Versioned record of risk analyses, chosen measures, residual risks and test results per system version.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

  16. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Conformity file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:conformity-ce-registration-record

    The assessment, EU declaration of conformity, CE marking and registration proof, per system version.

    Editorially reviewed | conformity, evidence

  17. Evidencev1.0.03 relations

    FRIA report and notification

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:fria-report

    Dated impact assessment, measures, residual risks and, where required, notification to the market surveillance authority.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, fundamental-rights

  18. Evidencev1.0.01 relations

    GPAI compliance file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:gpai-compliance-file

    Current technical documentation, downstream information, copyright policy and public training summary.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, gpai

  19. Evidencev1.0.02 relations

    Value-chain file

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:value-chain-representative-record

    Record per system of role, contractual arrangements on information and cooperation, and the appointment of a representative where required.

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, value-chain

What this explorer does not do

  • There is no article object. The article sits as a locator on the citations of an obligation, as free text. Filtering on the obligation is the same question, and the data does carry that.
  • No object carries an Annex III domain or use case. A selection of the form "systems for this purpose" cannot be expressed here.
  • A locator hangs on a statement in the data, not on a relation. The source next to a path is the source anchor of the object carrying the relation, not proof of that one connection.
  • The split between duty holder and affected actor exists on obligations only. On every other type the actor list is still one undifferentiated list.
  • The graph stores no inverse relations. The incoming direction is computed here over the same release and adds nothing to the data.
  • Topics are free slugs, not a taxonomy with objects, labels or a hierarchy of their own.

The same selection as data

The explorer and the API read the same object against the same two time axes. What you see here can be fetched with the same parameters.