Technical documentation
The documentation that providers of high-risk AI systems must draw up before market placement, comprising at minimum the nine Annex IV elements, demonstrating compliance with Chapter III Section 2 requirements and providing the information national competent authorities and notified bodies need to assess compliance (Article 11(1), Regulation (EU) 2024/1689).
Defined in 2 GAGE programs, which carry 3 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in EU AI Act Implementation Expert.
How each discipline defines it
The same term does different work depending on who is using it. These are the definitions as each program teaches them, unedited.
The documentation that providers of high-risk AI systems must draw up before market placement, comprising at minimum the nine Annex IV elements, demonstrating compliance with Chapter III Section 2 requirements and providing the information national competent authorities and notified bodies need to assess compliance (Article 11(1), Regulation (EU) 2024/1689).
The evidence file that a provider of a high-risk AI system must draw up before placing the system on the market, and keep up to date, under Article 11 of the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), demonstrating that the system complies with the Chapter III, Section 2 requirements. Annex IV sets its required structure.
The documentation drawn up by the provider before placing a high-risk AI system on the market, as required by Article 11 and Annex IV, demonstrating compliance with all Section 2 requirements (Articles 9 to 15). Must be kept for 10 years after the system is placed on the market or put into service (Article 18).
Where it is taught
The exact lessons this term appears in. The first module of every program is free with a free account.
- Data governance for the conformity file: your chapter in the document the regulator reads · Lineage Under Audit, Certified AI Data Governance Professional (CADGP)
- Third-Party AI Vendor Compliance Assessment · AI System Inventory and Classification, EU AI Act Implementation Expert
- Assembling the Technical File · High-Risk AI Requirements: The Technical File, EU AI Act Implementation Expert
Where it shows up at work
A definition is where Technical documentation starts. The lessons above teach it inside the competencies below, which are what job descriptions ask for and what the GAGE credential records. Every link here is drawn from the same careers map that builds a role's readiness check.
Tiers vendors by use and impact, requests evidence instead of promises, tests in the customer's context, and plans monitoring and exit.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Classifies a system by role and risk tier, knows which obligations bind on which date after the Digital Omnibus, and what evidence conformity needs.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Writes requirements, runs a fair evaluation, pilots within limits, and refuses a demo as evidence.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Roles that hire for it
Each role page shows the full competency set, what the seat decides, and a readiness check against your own evidence.
- Chief Information Officer, technology leadership editionneeds it at depth
- AI Vendor Risk Managerneeds it at depth
- Third-Party AI Risk Analystneeds it at depth
- Chief Compliance Officer, AI compliance editionneeds working knowledge
- AI Governance Managerneeds working knowledge
- Third-Party Cyber Risk Managerneeds it at depth
How job descriptions say it
Postings rarely use the textbook word. These are the phrases the careers map reads as asking for the competencies above.
Where the frameworks place it: NIST AI RMF GOVERN 6 and MANAGE 3; ISO/IEC 42001 Annex A supplier controls; Regulation (EU) 2024/1689; Regulation (EU) 2026/1744.
One interview question about it
A business unit wants to buy an AI tool next week. What do you ask the vendor, what evidence do you require, and what would make you say no?
Asked of candidates for ai vendor due diligence and third-party risk. Answering it in your own words is exactly how a GAGE topic is passed, and the credential records the pass where an employer can check it.
If you come from another field
Some backgrounds already carry this competency, and the readiness check gives credit for it.
- Privacy and data protection carries it as a claim to back up: Processor and vendor review is routine privacy work.
- Cybersecurity and IT carries it as a claim to back up: Supplier security assessment is routine.
- Nonprofit program and grants oversight carries it as a claim to back up: Reviewing grant and vendor agreements for data terms is vendor review.
Terms it appears with
Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.