Table of contents

Section 1: Classification of AI Systems as High-Risk

Article 6: Classification Rules for High-Risk AI Systems

Article 7: Amendments to Annex III

Section 2: Requirements for High-Risk AI Systems

Article 8: Compliance with the Requirements

Article 9: Risk Management System

Article 10: Data and Data Governance

Article 11: Technical Documentation

Article 12: Record-Keeping

Article 13: Transparency and Provision of Information to Deployers

Article 14: Human Oversight

Article 15: Accuracy, Robustness and Cybersecurity

Section 3: Obligations of Providers and Deployers of High-Risk AI Systems and Other Parties

Article 16: Obligations of Providers of High-Risk AI Systems

Article 17: Quality Management System

Article 18: Documentation Keeping

Article 19: Automatically Generated Logs

Article 20: Corrective Actions and Duty of Information

Article 21: Cooperation with Competent Authorities

Article 22: Authorised Representatives of providers of high-risk AI systems

Article 23: Obligations of Importers

Article 24: Obligations of Distributors

Article 25: Responsibilities Along the AI Value Chain

Article 26: Obligations of Deployers of High-Risk AI Systems

Article 27: Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment for High-Risk AI Systems

Section 4: Notifying Authorities and Notified Bodies

Article 28: Notifying Authorities

Article 29: Application of a Conformity Assessment Body for Notification

Article 30: Notification Procedure

Article 31: Requirements Relating to Notified Bodies

Article 32: Presumption of Conformity with Requirements Relating to Notified Bodies

Article 33: Subsidiaries of and Subcontracting by Notified Bodies

Article 34: Operational Obligations of Notified Bodies

Article 35: Identification Numbers and Lists of Notified Bodies Designated Under this Regulation

Article 36: Changes to Notifications

Article 37: Challenge to the Competence of Notified Bodies

Article 38: Coordination of Notified Bodies

Article 39: Conformity Assessment Bodies of Third Countries

Section 5: Standards, Conformity Assessment, Certificates, Registration

Article 40: Harmonised Standards and Standardisation Deliverables

Article 41: Common Specifications

Article 42: Presumption of Conformity with Certain Requirements

Article 43: Conformity Assessment

Article 44: Certificates

Article 45: Information Obligations of Notified Bodies

Article 46: Derogation from Conformity Assessment Procedure

Article 47: EU Declaration of Conformity

Article 48: CE Marking

Article 49: Registration

Section 1: Post-Market Monitoring

Article 72: Post-Market Monitoring by Providers and Post-Market Monitoring Plan for High-Risk AI Systems

Section 2: Sharing of Information on Serious Incidents

Article 73: Reporting of Serious Incidents

Section 3: Enforcement

Article 74: Market Surveillance and Control of AI Systems in the Union Market

Article 75: Mutual Assistance, Market Surveillance and Control of General Purpose AI Systems

Article 76: Supervision of Testing in Real World Conditions by Market Surveillance Authorities

Article 77: Powers of Authorities Protecting Fundamental Rights

Article 78: Confidentiality

Article 79: Procedure for Dealing with AI Systems Presenting a Risk at National Level

Article 80: Procedure for Dealing with AI Systems Classified by the Provider as a Not High-Risk in Application of Annex III

Article 81: Union Safeguard Procedure

Article 82: Compliant AI Systems Which Present a Risk

Article 83: Formal Non-Compliance

Article 84: Union AI Testing Support Structures

Section 4: Remedies

Article 85: Right to Lodge a Complaint with a Market Surveillance Authority

Article 86: A Right to Explanation of Individual Decision-Making

Article 87: Reporting of Breaches and Protection of Reporting Persons

Section 5: Supervision, Investigation, Enforcement and Monitoring in Respect of Providers of General Purpose AI Models

Article 88: Enforcement of Obligations on Providers of General Purpose AI Models

Article 89 : Monitoring Actions

Article 90: Alerts of Systemic Risks by the Scientific Panel

Article 91: Power to Request Documentation and Information

Article 92: Power to Conduct Evaluations

Article 93: Power to Request Measures

Article 94: Procedural Rights of Economic Operators of the General Purpose AI Model


Search within the Act

2 May 2024 – The AI Act Explorer has now been updated with content from the European Parliament's 'Corrigendum' version from 19 April 2024. The content of the Act is unlikely to change any further.

Recital 111

Feedback – We are working to improve this tool. Please send feedback to Risto Uuk at

It is appropriate to establish a methodology for the classification of general-purpose AI models as general-purpose AI model with systemic risks. Since systemic risks result from particularly high capabilities, a general-purpose AI model should be considered to present systemic risks if it has high-impact capabilities, evaluated on the basis of appropriate technical tools and methodologies, or significant impact on the internal market due to its reach. High-impact capabilities in general-purpose AI models means capabilities that match or exceed the capabilities recorded in the most advanced general-purpose AI models. The full range of capabilities in a model could be better understood after its placing on the market or when deployers interact with the model. According to the state of the art at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, the cumulative amount of computation used for the training of the general-purpose AI model measured in floating point operations is one of the relevant approximations for model capabilities. The cumulative amount of computation used for training includes the computation used across the activities and methods that are intended to enhance the capabilities of the model prior to deployment, such as pre-training, synthetic data generation and finetuning. Therefore, an initial threshold of floating point operations should be set, which, if met by a general-purpose AI model, leads to a presumption that the model is a general-purpose AI model with systemic risks. This threshold should be adjusted over time to reflect technological and industrial changes, such as algorithmic improvements or increased hardware efficiency, and should be supplemented with benchmarks and indicators for model capability. To inform this, the AI Office should engage with the scientific community, industry, civil society and other experts. Thresholds, as well as tools and benchmarks for the assessment of high-impact capabilities, should be strong predictors of generality, its capabilities and associated systemic risk of general-purpose AI models, and could take into account the way the model will be placed on the market or the number of users it may affect. To complement this system, there should be a possibility for the Commission to take individual decisions designating a general-purpose AI model as a general-purpose AI model with systemic risk if it is found that such model has capabilities or an impact equivalent to those captured by the set threshold. That decision should be taken on the basis of an overall assessment of the criteria for the designation of a general-purpose AI model with systemic risk set out in an annex to this Regulation, such as quality or size of the training data set, number of business and end users, its input and output modalities, its level of autonomy and scalability, or the tools it has access to. Upon a reasoned request of a provider whose model has been designated as a general-purpose AI model with systemic risk, the Commission should take the request into account and may decide to reassess whether the general-purpose AI model can still be considered to present systemic risks.

The text used in this tool is the ‘Artificial Intelligence Act, Corrigendum, 19 April 2024’. Interinstitutional File: 2021/0106(COD)