Turn an AI use case into its EU AI Act risk class, the regulations it triggers, the obligations, the architecture and the evidence you owe — in about two minutes.
Community-curated knowledge graph, peer-reviewed by experts across law, engineering and governance. Every change traceable →
Every regulation in the graph resolves into concrete technical components — through an article obligation, a control objective, a design pattern or an evidence artefact that a component must produce. Pick a regulation to see its technical surface, how each component is derived, and in which of the triggering use cases it is actually part of the required stack. The gap counts show where the graph reaches a component that no use case yet requires — those are open contribution targets, not settled answers. Open the full graph →
Cyber-resilience duties for essential/important entities: supply-chain risk management, incident response, 24h early warning / 72h notification. AI components count as operational IT in scope.
5 components0 articles / obligations4 triggering use casesopen in graph
OpenTelemetry / FCoT Tracing
75% of use cases
Hierarchical trace spans for every sub-task, prompt, retrieved document and API call — the reconstructible decision path for Art. 12/14 and PLD disclosure.
evidence artefactNIS2 Directive → Event Logs & Decision Traces → produced by OpenTelemetry / FCoT TracingEvent Logs & Decision Traces
Append-only, hash-chained audit vault (WORM object-lock storage, AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit). Guarantees tamper-evidence within the organization's trust domain — which stops your own team, but not an admin who can rebuild the vault. Pair with an external trust anchor and key ceremonies outside the operating team for evidence that holds against the insider scenario.