Why this object hangs off that object

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Hangs off: Article 4: AI literacy

Editorially reviewed | ai-literacy, evidence

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

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, transparency

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

Hangs off: Article 55: GPAI models with systemic risk

Editorially reviewed | evidence, gpai-systemic-risk

Per model: the decision whether or not to adhere to a code of practice, the version and chapter it relates to, the date and the authorised signatory, whether adherence was limited under paragraph 7 to the obligations in Article 53, and, where the decision is negative, the elaboration of your own for the issues in paragraph 2.

Hangs off: Article 56: codes of practice for general-purpose AI models

Editorially reviewed | evidence, governance, gpai, gpai-systemic-risk

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, post-market

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, post-market

Per submission: which system, which document, which version, to which recipient, on what date, which part was marked confidential, and which purpose the recipient stated.

Hangs off: Article 78: confidentiality of what you submit to an authority

Editorially reviewed | enforcement, evidence, governance

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, high-risk-requirements

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

Editorially reviewed | conformity, evidence

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, fundamental-rights

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

Hangs off: Article 53: GPAI model providers

Editorially reviewed | evidence, gpai

The written mandate itself, in an official language of the institutions of the Union, together with the copy of the Annex XI technical documentation, the contact details of the provider, and the record of the verification under paragraph 3(a). The provider grants the mandate and supplies the documentation; the ten year retention after the placing on the market rests under paragraph 3(b) with the representative, which keeps the file at the disposal of the AI Office and national competent authorities.

Hangs off: Article 54: authorised representative of a provider of a GPAI model

Editorially reviewed | evidence, gpai

Per body: identification number, Member State of establishment, the conformity assessment activities and system types for which it is notified, the date of each check against the public list, the outcome of the independence test, the subcontracted tasks with your written agreement, and every notice of a change to its designation.

Hangs off: Articles 28 to 39: notifying authorities and notified bodies

Editorially reviewed | conformity, evidence, governance

Per model version: the measured and planned training compute with the scope of recital 111, so including pre-training, synthetic data generation and fine-tuning, the moment the threshold was reached or foreseen, the notification sent with its supporting information, any arguments under paragraph 2, any reassessment request under paragraph 5, and the response or designation decision of the Commission.

Hangs off: Article 52: notification of a GPAI model with systemic risk

Editorially reviewed | gpai-systemic-risk

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

Editorially reviewed | evidence, value-chain