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

15 objects in this selection.

  1. ActionUpcomingv1.0.04 relations

    Map the affected groups and their specific risks of harm

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:action:fria-affected-groups-analysis

    Name the categories of natural persons and groups likely to be affected by the use in this specific context, and work out the specific risks of harm per category, using the information the provider supplied under Article 13.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights

  2. Actionv1.0.06 relations

    Perform a FRIA before deployment

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:action:fria-assess

    Assess process, duration, affected persons, risks, oversight, mitigation and complaint mechanisms and notify results where required.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights, high-risk

  3. ActionUpcomingv1.0.04 relations

    Set up the complaint mechanism and internal governance before the system runs

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:action:fria-complaint-mechanism-setup

    Describe the measures taken if a risk materialises, who decides internally, through which route an affected person can complain, within which deadline you respond, and who is authorised to stop the use.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights

  4. ChangeIn forcev1.0.06 relations

    FRIA follows new date and may cross-reference a DPIA

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:change:2026-07-27-fria-date-and-dpia-link

    The FRIA for the relevant Annex III route follows 2 December 2027 and may include or cross-reference relevant DPIA elements.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Placed against the official source | fundamental-rights, high-risk

  5. ControlUpcomingv1.0.04 relations

    Currency check on the FRIA elements during use

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:control:fria-in-use-currency-check

    Periodically and on every change in process, duration of use, affected groups, risks or oversight measures, check whether the recorded elements still hold, and update the information as soon as they do not.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights

  6. Controlv1.0.05 relations

    Pre-deployment FRIA go/no-go

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:control:fria-pre-deployment-gate

    Block deployment until applicability, assessment, mitigation and notification have been completed.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | control, fundamental-rights

  7. EvidenceUpcomingv1.0.04 relations

    Notification to the market surveillance authority with the completed template

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:fria-authority-notification

    The sent notification through which you report the assessment results to the market surveillance authority, with the completed template attached, plus date of dispatch and acknowledgement of receipt.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights

  8. EvidenceUpcomingv1.0.04 relations

    Crosswalk showing the FRIA complements rather than repeats the DPIA

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:evidence:fria-dpia-crosswalk

    An overview indicating per Article 27(1) element whether it is already covered in the data protection impact assessment and where, so it is visible which elements exist only in the FRIA.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights

  9. Evidencev1.0.06 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.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | evidence, fundamental-rights

  10. ExampleEditorialv1.0.03 relations

    Awarding social assistance in a municipality: the FRIA and the notification

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-fria-bijstandsuitkering-gemeente

    A municipality wants to deploy an AI system that sorts applications for social assistance benefits and indicates which files merit extra scrutiny before a case worker decides. The application is already listed in the public algorithm register. The question is what has to be in place before the first citizen passes through this system.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Placed against the official source | examples

  11. ExampleEditorialv1.0.03 relations

    Recidivism scoring in police work: when the assessment must be redone

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-fria-recidiverisico-politie

    A police service deploys an AI system that estimates the recidivism risk of a suspect, as an aid to the judgements later made by the prosecution service and the court. The model is subsequently retrained on newer investigative data and use is extended to a second region. The question is whether the assessment made for first use remains adequate.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Placed against the official source | examples

  12. ExampleEditorialv1.0.03 relations

    Selection at student admission: a DPIA is not yet a FRIA

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-fria-selectie-inschrijving-hogeschool

    A university of applied sciences has an AI system rank applications for a vocational programme, using the exam results of earlier students to calibrate that ranking. A data protection impact assessment already exists for this processing. The question the school asks is whether that also covers the fundamental rights side of admission.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Placed against the official source | examples

  13. ExampleGuidancev1.0.02 relations

    Health insurer using AI for risk assessment: public or private makes no difference

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-fria-zorgverzekeraar-risicobeoordeling

    A health insurer uses AI for risk assessment and pricing of health and life insurance. The question is whether this falls under point 5(c) of Annex III, and with that whether the Article 27 FRIA duty comes into play.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Placed against the official source | examples

  14. ObligationUpcomingv1.0.024 relations

    Article 27: FRIA

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-27-fria

    Fundamental rights impact assessment before deploying certain high-risk AI systems.

    Placed against the official source | fundamental-rights, high-risk

  15. Templatev1.0.05 relations

    FRIA questionnaire

    praxikon:eu:ai-act:template:fria-questionnaire

    Public generator for structuring a fundamental rights impact assessment.

    Hangs off: Article 27: FRIA

    Editorially reviewed | fundamental-rights, template

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.