Establish role, use and risk.
Define the intended purpose, whether your organisation is acting as a provider or deployer, and the applicable risk category. That establishes the proposed review scope.
AI governance,
backed by evidence.
For teams deciding whether an AI system is ready for use. We’re developing evidence-led reviews for requirements such as the EU AI Act, with unresolved governance questions surfaced for people to decide.
AI GovernanceIn developmentHelp shape an EU AI Act review
Prepare an EU AI Act review around the evidence.
The EU AI Act uses a risk-based framework and assigns obligations according to an organisation’s role and the system’s use. Baselex AI Governance is being developed to turn applicable requirements into a reviewable evidence record.
Connect obligations to evidence.
The proposed workflow would map requirements such as risk management, technical documentation, logging and human oversight to the supporting material your team has.
Recheck what changes.
The proposed workflow would recheck affected questions when configured regulations, system facts or evidence change. Reviewers would see what changed, what remains unresolved and which approval still requires a person.
Bring a review your team struggles with.
Which approval is held up? What evidence is difficult to obtain? Who needs to sign off? Bring an AI use case and the questions your reviewers need answered.
Today, we’re discussing requirements, not offering a finished product. These conversations will help define the checks, evidence sources and review roles for the first workflow.
This is not a certification service or a claim that a system meets every applicable obligation.
What would make your next AI review easier?
Talk through your use case with us and help define what the first AI Governance workflow should deliver.
Discuss requirements