+Artikel 4 AI-færdigheder
---+Artikel 4 1.
---+Artikel 4 2.
---+Artikel 4 3.
|
Artikel 4 AI-færdigheder
-
1. Oversigt
| Titel |
Regulering |
|
Artikel 4 1.
|
Udbydere og idriftsættere af AI-systemer træffer foranstaltninger til at støtte udviklingen af AI-færdigheder hos deres personale og andre personer, der er involveret i drift og anvendelse af AI-systemer på deres vegne, under hensyntagen til deres tekniske viden, erfaring og uddannelse og den kontekst, hvori AI-systemerne skal anvendes, og under hensyntagen til de personer eller grupper af personer, som AI-systemerne skal anvendes på. Denne forpligtelse pålægger ikke udbydere eller idriftsættere at garantere et specifikt niveau af AI-færdigheder hos nogen enkeltperson.
|
|
Artikel 4 2.
|
Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne støtter og letter den indsats, som udbydere og idriftsættere af AI-systemer, navnlig SMV'er, gør for at opfylde deres forpligtelse i henhold til denne artikels stk. 1. Med henblik herpå offentliggør Kommissionen praktiske eksempler på hvordan denne forpligtelse overholdes på den fælles informationsplatform, der er omhandlet i artikel 62, stk. 3, litra b).
|
|
Artikel 4 3.
|
AI-udvalget vedtager henstillinger under hensyntagen til de europæiske kompetencerammer for at støtte Kommissionen og medlemsstaterne i at fremme de AI-færdigheder, der kræves i henhold til stk. 1, herunder ved at fastsætte fælles mål.
|
,
1.1 Referencer
1.2 Identificerede krav
1.3 Relaterede standarder
2. Identificerede krav
3. Relaterede standarder
Standarder
| Kilde |
Krav |
|
SCF
|
AI & Autonomous Technologies Stakeholder Competencies
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT)-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for AAT are defined, assessed and documented.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Artificial Intelligence (AI) / autonomous technologies governance program
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Artificial Intelligence (AI) / autonomous technologies governance program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Artificial Intelligence (AI) / autonomous technologies governance program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Artificial Intelligence (AI) / autonomous technologies governance program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Artificial Intelligence (AI) / autonomous technologies governance program
SCR-CMM
Level 0 Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 Performed Informally
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with AAT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ AAT-related processes are expected to follow the organization's existing processes (e.g., incident response, asset management, change control and risk assessments). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide AAT oversight, where the Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, governs technology decisions what is acceptable for AAT within the organization.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Artificial Intelligence (AI)-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
Level 3 Well Defined
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIG) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of AI governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., dedicated AI governance platform). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AAT domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to ensure AAT-related operator and practitioner proficiency requirements for AAT are defined, assessed and documented.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
|
|