Your AI system makes thousands of decisions per day. It screens candidates, scores credit applications, flags anomalies, or suggests diagnoses. Now imagine a regulator asks you to reconstruct a single decision from six months ago — the inputs, the logic, the output, and who reviewed it. Can you? That is what Article 12 of the EU AI Act demands. And unlike Article 11, which requires documentation on paper, Article 12 is a technical construction requirement. Your system itself

Your AI system works. It passes internal tests. Your team is confident. But can you prove — on paper, to a regulator — that it meets every requirement the EU AI Act sets out? That is what Article 11 demands. Not a product description. Not a slide deck. A comprehensive technical documentation that demonstrates compliance with every requirement in Chapter 2 of the AI Act — before your system reaches the market. Article 11 turns your compliance work into evidence. And Annex IV t

Article 10 EU AI Act: Data and Data Governance Explained If Article 9 is the heart of high-risk AI compliance, Article 10 is the bloodstream. It governs everything that flows into your AI system: the data that trains it, validates it, and tests it. Get data governance wrong, and no amount of risk management will save you. Article 10 establishes requirements for data and data governance that apply to all high-risk AI systems — and it's the article with the closest connection t

180 pages. 113 articles. And if you're building a High-Risk AI system, Article 9 might be the most important one you need to understand. Why? Because Article 9 doesn't ask you to tick a box once. It requires you to build and maintain a Risk Management System (RMS) — a continuous, adaptive process that spans the entire lifecycle of your AI system. If Article 50 is about transparency (telling people they're interacting with AI), Article 9 is about responsibility: systematicall