New, with Accorian: a real-time AI governance framework for control drift in enterprise AI.Read the framework
AI Governance · EU AI Act
EU AI Act
AI behavior, controls, logs, and monitoring mapped to the Act's operational requirements for high-risk systems. Readiness evidence from one continuous pipeline, under the AI Governance lead.
RegulationEU AI Act
TypeBinding
Risk tiers4
High-risk obligations, mapped to evidence.
Every claim in the report traces back to source evidence, ownership, and the workflow decision it supports.
Valuefund next
Riskcontain now
Fluencytrain where work changed
What it isType: Binding regulationIssuer: European UnionAdopted: 2024, with phased obligationsScope: By role, risk tier, and deployment context
At a glance
A binding law, role- and risk-specific.
Obligation → Evidence
The Act names the obligations. We produce the evidence behind each.
EU AI Act obligationEvidence we produce
Classification & roleDetermine the risk tier and document the role in scopeSystem inventory, user population, intended purpose, role classification, tier rationale, review history
Risk & data governanceIdentify, mitigate, and monitor risk; govern data qualityRisk register, per-use-case baseline, data classification, quality checks, bias evaluation, mitigation log
Documentation & loggingMaintain records sufficient to understand behavior and changeAnnex IV-style technical file, model and prompt version history, trace log, evaluation output
Human oversight & monitoringDefine oversight, monitor behavior, record incidents, respondHuman-owner registry, escalation triggers, intervention log, drift detection, post-market monitoring report
One pipeline, every framework
How the EU AI Act evidence gets produced.
Trace
production behavior
Classify
sensitivitysource
Evaluate
per-use-case baseline
Map
every framework
Pack
on demand
What teams should remember
Three things EU AI Act evidence gets right.
01
The Act is role-specific
Buying a tool, deploying a model, or shipping a product can carry different duties. Name the role first.
02
High-risk evidence must stay fresh
Technical docs are not a launch artifact. Changes, incidents, and monitoring need versioned, current evidence.
03
Compliance teams need source pointers
A control claim points back to the trace, baseline, policy, owner, and timestamp, or it is narrative, not evidence.
EU AI Act, asked plainly
Direct answers.
It is binding law. ISO 42001 is a management-system standard; NIST AI RMF is a voluntary framework.
Keep the evidence map connected
Pairs cleanly with the rest.
Specialist AI builder, across the board
One builder, across the board.
We take your AI from strategy to outcome, with governance, audit, and evals built into every build. Start with a discovery call, or a quick audit.