title: “EU AI Act Mapping” description: “How AIGO relates to the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act.”
EU AI Act Mapping
The AIGO Framework provides a dedicated mapping package for relating AIGO governance activities and controls to the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act). The mapping is intended to help organizations use AIGO as an operational governance layer while maintaining traceability to relevant AI Act requirements and concepts. It does not replace the AI Act, authoritative regulatory guidance, or legal interpretation.Purpose
The EU AI Act mapping can help organizations: * identify potentially relevant AI Act requirements * relate AI Act concepts to AIGO governance activities * connect requirements to AIGO controls * identify potentially relevant evidence * support implementation planning * support gap analysis * support assurance and review * maintain traceability between external requirements and internal governance records The mapping should be used together with the applicable AI Act provisions and current authoritative guidance.Mapping scope
The AIGO v0.1 EU AI Act mapping package addresses areas including: * applicability and scope * implementation timeline * prohibited AI practices * high-risk AI systems * transparency requirements * governance and enforcement * conformity and documentation * AI literacy * rights and remedies * general-purpose AI * AIGO control relationships * evidence relationships * assurance relationships * supporting annex relationships The detailed mapping artifacts are maintained separately under the repository mapping package.How to use the mapping
A practical implementation approach is: 1. Determine whether the AI Act is applicable to the organization and AI system. 2. Identify the relevant AI Act provision or requirement. 3. Locate the corresponding AIGO mapping relationship. 4. Identify the applicable AIGO governance activity or control. 5. Determine what evidence is required. 6. Assess whether the relevant governance activity or control has been implemented. 7. Record findings or gaps. 8. Remediate identified deficiencies where required. 9. Obtain the appropriate governance approval or assurance. 10. Reassess when requirements, systems, or governance conditions change. A simplified relationship is: AI Act requirement → AIGO mapping → governance activity / control → evidence → assessment → assurance The mapping provides the relationship between the external requirement and AIGO. The organization must still determine whether the resulting governance implementation satisfies the applicable legal obligation.AI system applicability
The AI Act contains requirements that depend on the nature, use, role, and context of an AI system. AIGO can provide governance records that help organizations maintain information relevant to this determination, including: * AI system identity * intended use * deployment context * affected stakeholders * classification * risk information * applicable governance requirements * controls * evidence * approvals * monitoring * incidents * changes AIGO classification should not be assumed to be legally identical to an AI Act classification. Where an AI Act legal classification is required, it should be determined against the applicable provisions of the AI Act and authoritative interpretation.Relationship to AIGO controls
The mapping includes relationships between relevant AI Act concepts and AIGO governance controls. These relationships can help organizations identify controls that may contribute to implementation of applicable requirements. A relationship may indicate that an AIGO control: * supports an AI Act requirement * contributes to implementation of a requirement * provides relevant governance evidence * supports assessment or assurance * addresses only part of a broader requirement A mapping does not mean that the AIGO control independently satisfies the complete AI Act obligation. The full legal requirement, including its conditions, exceptions, scope, applicability, and implementation requirements, must be considered.Evidence and traceability
The mapping can be connected to the AIGO evidence model. Potential evidence relationships include: * AI system records * classification decisions * risk assessments * control assessments * technical or governance documentation * approvals * monitoring records * incident records * change records * assurance records * management reviews * improvement records This supports a traceability chain such as: AI Act requirement → AIGO control → evidence → assessment → assurance The existence of evidence does not automatically demonstrate legal compliance. Evidence must be assessed for relevance, completeness, accuracy, currency, and sufficiency against the applicable requirement.High-risk AI
The mapping includes material relating to high-risk AI systems. Organizations should distinguish between: AIGO governance classification and: AI Act legal classification AIGO can support the information, assessment, control, evidence, and approval processes needed to manage an AI system. However, an AIGO classification record should not be treated as a legal determination of whether an AI system is high-risk under the AI Act. The applicable legal provisions and current authoritative guidance must be used for that determination.Transparency
The mapping includes relationships relevant to transparency obligations. AIGO governance records can support implementation and traceability through activities such as: * system registration * intended-use documentation * stakeholder identification * control implementation * evidence collection * monitoring * approval * assurance Organizations should determine the specific transparency obligations applicable to each AI system based on the AI Act and relevant circumstances.Governance and accountability
The mapping can connect AI Act governance expectations with AIGO governance structures. Relevant AIGO records may include: * governance responsibilities * accountable roles * decision authority * policies * procedures * approvals * evidence * assurance * management review * improvement activities This can help organizations establish an operational governance structure while maintaining traceability to external requirements.Documentation and records
The AI Act contains documentation and record-related requirements that may be relevant to different AI systems and actors. AIGO can provide structured governance records for activities such as: * system registration * classification * risk assessment * control assessment * approval * monitoring * incidents * changes * assurance * retirement The organization should determine which records are legally required and whether the AIGO records contain sufficient information for the applicable requirement.General-purpose AI
The mapping includes material relating to general-purpose AI. Organizations should take care not to assume that the same governance treatment applies to every organization or AI system involved with general-purpose AI. The applicable role, system characteristics, deployment context, and relevant AI Act provisions must be considered when determining obligations. AIGO governance records can provide supporting context but do not independently determine legal applicability.Rights and remedies
The mapping includes relationships to relevant rights and remedy considerations. Where applicable, organizations may need to connect governance activities with: * affected individuals or stakeholders * impact considerations * decisions * documentation * escalation * incident handling * review * corrective action AIGO can provide governance mechanisms for these activities, but applicable legal rights and remedies remain governed by the relevant law.Evaluation and automation
AIGO’s machine-readable evaluation layer can potentially support automated checks of defined governance conditions. The conceptual relationship is: AI Act requirement → AIGO mapping → governance condition → rule → evaluation → result An evaluation result should be interpreted as the result of the defined machine-readable condition. It should not automatically be interpreted as: * legal advice * a legal determination * regulatory approval * certification * conformity assessment * proof of compliance Human review remains necessary where legal interpretation, contextual judgment, or professional assessment is required.Maintenance
The EU AI Act and associated implementation materials can change independently of AIGO. The mapping should therefore be reviewed when: * the AI Act changes * implementing or delegated acts change * authoritative guidance changes * relevant regulatory interpretations change * organizational use of AI changes * an AI system changes * applicable obligations change Mapping updates should preserve appropriate version and source traceability.Important limitation
The AIGO EU AI Act mapping is an interpretive governance mapping. It does not: * establish legal compliance * constitute legal advice * replace the AI Act * replace authoritative regulatory guidance * establish certification or accreditation * constitute regulatory conformity assessment * guarantee that an organization satisfies an applicable obligation Organizations remain responsible for determining their legal obligations. For high-impact legal or regulatory decisions, the applicable authoritative sources and appropriate legal or regulatory expertise should be consulted.Canonical source
The complete EU AI Act mapping package is maintained in:mappings/eu-ai-act/
The repository contains the controlled AIGO mapping artifacts and associated supporting materials.
The mapping package should be treated as version-controlled implementation material and should be interpreted against the authoritative external sources applicable at the time of use.