An open knowledge graph-based approach for mapping concepts and requirements between the EU AI act and international standards

Julio Hernandez, Delaram Golpayegani, Dave Lewis
{"title":"An open knowledge graph-based approach for mapping concepts and requirements between the EU AI act and international standards","authors":"Julio Hernandez,&nbsp;Delaram Golpayegani,&nbsp;Dave Lewis","doi":"10.1007/s43681-025-00708-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The many initiatives on trustworthy AI result in a confusing and multipolar landscape that organizations operating within the fluid and complex international value chains must navigate in pursuing trustworthy AI. The EU’s AI Act will now shift the focus of such organizations toward conformance with the technical requirements for regulatory compliance, for which the Act relies on <i>Harmonized Standards</i>. Though a high-level mapping to the Act’s requirements will be part of such harmonization, determining the degree to which standards conformity delivers regulatory compliance with the AI Act remains a complex challenge. Variance and gaps in the definitions of concepts and how they are used in requirements between the Act and harmonized standards may impact the consistency of compliance claims across organizations, sectors, and applications. This may present regulatory uncertainty, especially for SMEs and public sector bodies relying on standards conformance rather than proprietary equivalents for developing and deploying compliant high-risk AI systems. To address this challenge, this paper offers a simple and repeatable mechanism for mapping the terms and requirements relevant to normative statements in regulations and standards, e.g., AI Act and ISO management system standards, texts into open knowledge graphs. This representation is used to assess the adequacy of standards conformance to regulatory compliance and thereby provide a basis for identifying areas where further technical consensus development in trustworthy AI value chains is required to achieve regulatory compliance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72137,"journal":{"name":"AI and ethics","volume":"5 5","pages":"4463 - 4474"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s43681-025-00708-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI and ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-025-00708-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The many initiatives on trustworthy AI result in a confusing and multipolar landscape that organizations operating within the fluid and complex international value chains must navigate in pursuing trustworthy AI. The EU’s AI Act will now shift the focus of such organizations toward conformance with the technical requirements for regulatory compliance, for which the Act relies on Harmonized Standards. Though a high-level mapping to the Act’s requirements will be part of such harmonization, determining the degree to which standards conformity delivers regulatory compliance with the AI Act remains a complex challenge. Variance and gaps in the definitions of concepts and how they are used in requirements between the Act and harmonized standards may impact the consistency of compliance claims across organizations, sectors, and applications. This may present regulatory uncertainty, especially for SMEs and public sector bodies relying on standards conformance rather than proprietary equivalents for developing and deploying compliant high-risk AI systems. To address this challenge, this paper offers a simple and repeatable mechanism for mapping the terms and requirements relevant to normative statements in regulations and standards, e.g., AI Act and ISO management system standards, texts into open knowledge graphs. This representation is used to assess the adequacy of standards conformance to regulatory compliance and thereby provide a basis for identifying areas where further technical consensus development in trustworthy AI value chains is required to achieve regulatory compliance.

基于开放知识图的方法,用于在欧盟人工智能法案和国际标准之间映射概念和需求
关于可信赖的人工智能的许多举措导致了一个令人困惑和多极化的格局,在流动和复杂的国际价值链中运营的组织必须在追求可信赖的人工智能方面进行导航。欧盟的人工智能法案现在将把这些组织的重点转移到符合法规遵从性的技术要求上,该法案依赖于协调标准。尽管对法案要求的高层次映射将是这种协调的一部分,但确定标准符合性在多大程度上交付对人工智能法案的法规遵从性仍然是一个复杂的挑战。概念定义的差异和差距,以及它们如何在法案和协调标准之间的需求中使用,可能会影响跨组织、部门和应用程序的遵从性声明的一致性。这可能会带来监管上的不确定性,特别是对于中小企业和公共部门机构来说,它们依赖于标准一致性,而不是开发和部署合规的高风险人工智能系统的专有等效物。为了应对这一挑战,本文提供了一种简单且可重复的机制,用于将法规和标准中与规范性陈述相关的术语和要求映射到开放的知识图谱中,例如,人工智能法案和ISO管理体系标准,文本。该表示用于评估标准是否符合法规遵从性,从而为确定需要在可信赖的人工智能价值链中进一步达成技术共识以实现法规遵从性的领域提供基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信