The scientific panel of independent experts (the Scientific Panel) is a body established under the EU AI Act to support the enforcement of rules on general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and systems. It sits within the Act’s broader governance architecture as one of the three advisory bodies, alongside the AI Board ( established under Article 65) and Advisory Forum (established under Article 67). It advises the AI Office and national authorities on systemic risks, model classification, evaluation methodologies, and cross-border market surveillance, and it is empowered to alert the AI Office to systemic risks. In this overview, we summarise the Scientific Panel’s legal basis, tasks and powers, working methods, and discuss the Commission’s appointment of the Scientific Panel on 1 June 2026.
Summary
- The Scientific Panel plays an important role in enforcement of the EU AI Act related to general-purpose AI. It does so, amongst other things, by providing advice, up-to-date insight into technical developments, and adopting qualified alerts for systemic risks.
- It is established by Article 68 of the EU AI Act, with the detailed arrangements set out in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/454 (Implementing Regulation).
- The Scientific Panel consists of up to 60 independent experts serving two-year renewable terms, selected to ensure fair gender balance and geographical representation. There is at least one expert per EU Member State and EFTA/EEA country (maximum three per country), and at least 80% of experts come from EU/EFTA/EEA nations. Members of the Scientific Panel were appointed on 1 June 2026.
- It has a broad range of tasks, with its core functions being advising and supporting the AI Office on the enforcement of GPAI requirements.
- Among its powers, the Scientific Panel can request information and formally alert the AI Office to possible Union-level systemic risks from GPAI models.
Overview
The Scientific Panel, established by the EU AI Act (Article 68(1)), provides advice to the AI Office and national authorities to support the enforcement of AI Act requirements, with a particular focus on GPAI models.
The Scientific Panel has a broad range of potential tasks, which are listed in Article 68(3). This includes supporting the implementation and enforcement of this Regulation as regards general-purpose AI models and systems Article 68(3)(a), in particular by:
- alerting the AI Office to possible risks posed by GPAI models, in accordance with Article 90;
- contributing to the development of tools and methodologies for evaluating capabilities of general-purpose AI models and systems, including through benchmarks;
- providing advice on the classification of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk;
- providing advice on the classification of various general-purpose AI models and systems;
- contributing to the development of tools and templates.
The Scientific Panel may also support market surveillance authorities at their request. In addition, experts from the Scientific Panel may conduct model evaluations under Article 92.
Free, independent, and here to stay.
Our goal is to build the most useful, authoritative, and comprehensive guide to the AI Act anywhere on the internet. We’ll never put this behind a paywall or use it to sell you a service. We do this because we think good AI governance matters, and that means making authoritative guidance genuinely accessible.
If you want to help us out, please consider contributing a guest post to help others understand and navigate the Act, or send your ideas and feedback for the website to me (Taylor, Design & Web Manager) at: websites@futureoflife.org. To stay up-to-date, subscribe to our bi-weekly AI Act newsletter, the world’s most trusted regular AI Act publication with over 50,000+ subscribers. We’ve published over 100 updates since 2022.
This website is built and maintained by the Future of Life Institute — the world’s oldest and largest nonprofit working for the responsible development of AI.
Powers
Qualified Alerts
The Scientific Panel can issue qualified alerts (Article 90) where it has reason to suspect that a GPAI model poses a concrete identifiable risk at Union level, or that it meets the systemic-risk conditions in Article 51. The criteria in Article 51 require the model is of systemic-risk if it has high impact capabilities (presumed where the cumulative compute used for training is greater than 10^25 floating-point operations) or where it has equivalent capabilities or impact as determined by a Commission decision (having regard to criteria in Annex XIII, such as parameters, dataset size, the number of register end users).
Such an alert allows the Commission, through the AI Office, to exercise its powers to request information and documentation from model providers, conduct evaluations and request measures. It can also lead to the Commission designating the model as having systemic risks, under the Article 52 procedure, subjecting the provider to additional obligations under Article 55 (such as risk assessment and mitigation, serious-incident reporting and cybersecurity measures).
Alerts require simple majority approval and must include provider contact information, justification, and relevant facts.
Information Requests
Through a rapporteur, and with the authorisation of at least one third of the members, the Scientific Panel may request the Commission to issue a request for documentation or information to a GPAI model provider under Article 91(3). The request must demonstrate that the assistance is necessary and proportionate. The AI Office may grant or refuse it, with further procedural details included in the Implementing Regulation.
Structure and Composition
The Scientific Panel comprises up to 60 independent experts serving two-year renewable terms. Gender balance and geographical representation is ensured by having at least one expert per EU Member State and EFTA/EEA country (maximum three per country). At a minimum, 80% of the experts must be from EU/EFTA/EEA nations.
The structure includes a Secretariat for administrative support, a Chair and Vice-Chair for the full term, and compensated rapporteurs and contributors for specific tasks. The panel operates transparently by publicly sharing expert information, opinions, recommendations, and stakeholder hearing records while protecting confidential business information.
Selection Criteria
The Implementing Regulation specifies the selection criteria and the required expertise. In particular, experts must demonstrate:
- Multidisciplinary expertise – Up-to-date scientific, technical, or socio-technical knowledge related to AI systems, general-purpose AI models, or AI impacts relevant to enforcing the AI Act;
- Independence – No conflicts of interest with AI systems or general-purpose AI model providers;
- Impartiality and objectivity – Ability to work without bias as required by the AI Act;
- Professional capability – Ability to carry out work diligently, accurately, and objectively.
In addition, the call for applications specified the areas in which candidates must have substantiated expertise, such as, for instance, model evaluation, risk assessment, technical mitigations, and misuse and systemic risks. It also set out the eligibility criteria.
Working methods
The Panel operates under the detailed arrangements set out in the Implementing Regulation. It works transparently, publicly sharing expert information, opinions, recommendations, and stakeholder hearing records, while protecting confidential business information.
Members must keep confidential the information and data obtained in carrying out their tasks, and they neither seek nor take instructions from anyone when exercising their functions. Each expert draws up a publicly available declaration of interests, and the AI Office must establish systems and procedures to actively manage and prevent potential conflicts of interest (Article 68(4) AI Act).
Announcement of the Scientific Panel
The Commission launched its call for expression of interest on 16 June 2025, with applications open until 14 September 2025. On 1 June 2026, the Commission announced that 60 independent experts had been recruited and published the full list of members, marking the panel’s establishment. Further information, including the list of members, is available on the Commission’s website.