+Άρθρο 52 Διαδικασία
---+Άρθρο 52 1.
---+Άρθρο 52 2.
---+Άρθρο 52 3.
---+Άρθρο 52 4.
---+Άρθρο 52 5.
---+Άρθρο 52 6.

Άρθρο 52 Διαδικασία

1. Επισκόπηση

,
Τίτλος Κανονισμός
Άρθρο 52 1.
Όταν ένα μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού πληροί τις προϋποθέσεις που αναφέρονται στο άρθρο 51 παράγραφος 1 στοιχείο α), ο σχετικός πάροχος ενημερώνει την Επιτροπή χωρίς καθυστέρηση και σε κάθε περίπτωση εντός δύο εβδομάδων από την εκπλήρωση των εν λόγω απαιτήσεων ή από τη στιγμή που καθίσταται γνωστό ότι οι εν λόγω απαιτήσεις θα πληρούνται. Η εν λόγω ενημέρωση περιλαμβάνει τις πληροφορίες που απαιτούνται για να αποδειχθεί ότι πληρούται η σχετική απαίτηση. Εάν η Επιτροπή λάβει γνώση μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού που παρουσιάζει συστημικούς κινδύνους για τους οποίους δεν έχει ενημερωθεί, μπορεί να αποφασίσει να το χαρακτηρίσει ως μοντέλο με συστημικό κίνδυνο.
Άρθρο 52 2.
Ο πάροχος μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού που πληροί τις προϋποθέσεις που αναφέρονται στο άρθρο 51 παράγραφος 1 στοιχείο α) μπορεί να παρουσιάσει, με την ενημέρωσή του, επαρκώς τεκμηριωμένα επιχειρήματα για να αποδείξει ότι, κατ’ εξαίρεση, μολονότι πληροί την εν λόγω απαίτηση, το μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού δεν παρουσιάζει, λόγω των ειδικών χαρακτηριστικών του, συστημικούς κινδύνους και, ως εκ τούτου, δεν θα πρέπει να ταξινομηθεί ως μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού με συστημικό κίνδυνο.
Άρθρο 52 3.
Εάν η Επιτροπή καταλήξει στο συμπέρασμα ότι τα επιχειρήματα που υποβλήθηκαν δυνάμει της παραγράφου 2 δεν είναι επαρκώς τεκμηριωμένα και ότι ο σχετικός πάροχος δεν ήταν σε θέση να αποδείξει ότι το μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού δεν παρουσιάζει, λόγω των ειδικών χαρακτηριστικών του, συστημικούς κινδύνους, απορρίπτει τα εν λόγω επιχειρήματα και το μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού θεωρείται μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού με συστημικό κίνδυνο.
Άρθρο 52 4.
Η Επιτροπή μπορεί να ορίσει ένα μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού ως μοντέλο που παρουσιάζει συστημικούς κινδύνους, αυτεπαγγέλτως ή κατόπιν ειδικής προειδοποίησης της επιστημονικής ομάδας δυνάμει του άρθρου 90 παράγραφος 1 στοιχείο α), βάσει των κριτηρίων που καθορίζονται στο παράρτημα XIII.

Ανατίθεται στην Επιτροπή η εξουσία να εκδίδει κατ’ εξουσιοδότηση πράξεις σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 97 προκειμένου να τροποποιεί το παράρτημα XIII καθορίζοντας και επικαιροποιώντας τα κριτήρια που ορίζονται στο εν λόγω παράρτημα.

Άρθρο 52 5.
Κατόπιν αιτιολογημένου αιτήματος παρόχου του οποίου το μοντέλο έχει χαρακτηριστεί ως μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού με συστημικό κίνδυνο δυνάμει της παραγράφου 4, η Επιτροπή λαμβάνει υπόψη το αίτημα και μπορεί να αποφασίσει να επαναξιολογήσει εάν το μοντέλο ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού μπορεί ακόμη να θεωρηθεί ότι παρουσιάζει συστημικούς κινδύνους βάσει των κριτηρίων που καθορίζονται στο παράρτημα XIII. Το εν λόγω αίτημα περιέχει αντικειμενικούς, λεπτομερείς και νέους λόγους που έχουν ανακύψει μετά την απόφαση χαρακτηρισμού. Οι πάροχοι μπορούν να ζητήσουν επαναξιολόγηση το νωρίτερο έξι μήνες μετά την απόφαση χαρακτηρισμού. Εάν η Επιτροπή, μετά την επαναξιολόγησή της, αποφασίσει να διατηρήσει τον χαρακτηρισμό ως μοντέλου ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού με συστημικό κίνδυνο, οι πάροχοι μπορούν να ζητήσουν επαναξιολόγηση το νωρίτερο έξι μήνες μετά την εν λόγω απόφαση.
Άρθρο 52 6.
Η Επιτροπή μεριμνά για τη δημοσίευση καταλόγου μοντέλων ΤΝ γενικού σκοπού με συστημικό κίνδυνο και επικαιροποιεί τον εν λόγω κατάλογο, με την επιφύλαξη της ανάγκης τήρησης και προστασίας των δικαιωμάτων διανοητικής ιδιοκτησίας και των εμπιστευτικών επιχειρηματικών πληροφοριών ή του εμπορικού απορρήτου σύμφωνα με το ενωσιακό και το εθνικό δίκαιο.

1.1 Παραπομπές

1.2 Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

1.3 Σχετικά πρότυπα

2. Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

Απαιτήσεις
Πηγή Απαίτηση

3. Σχετικά πρότυπα

Πρότυπα
Πηγή Απαίτηση
SCF AI & Autonomous Technologies Registration

Description

Mechanisms exist to maintain a current registration for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with the appropriate governing body, as required by statutory or regulatory requirements.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2

∙ Determine whether any AI use requires registration (e.g., EU AI Act high-risk systems)

Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4

∙ Track AI registration obligations by jurisdiction in compliance checklist

Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6

∙ Register high-risk AI systems with relevant authorities as required

Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8

∙ AI registration compliance program
∙ Track registration requirements by jurisdiction

Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9

∙ Enterprise AI regulatory compliance platform
∙ Automated registration tracking
∙ EU AI Act database registration compliance

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.
▪ AAT is regarded as a technology and governed by the entity's existing IT governance practices.
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide oversight of AAT-related activities. GRC functions are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC 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 CPL 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 maintain a current registration for AAT with the appropriate governing body, as required by statutory or regulatory requirements.

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.
SCF AI & Autonomous Technologies Registration

Description

Mechanisms exist to maintain a current registration for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) with the appropriate governing body, as required by statutory or regulatory requirements.

Possible Solutions & Considerations

Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2

∙ Determine whether any AI use requires registration (e.g., EU AI Act high-risk systems)

Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4

∙ Track AI registration obligations by jurisdiction in compliance checklist

Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6

∙ Register high-risk AI systems with relevant authorities as required

Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8

∙ AI registration compliance program
∙ Track registration requirements by jurisdiction

Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9

∙ Enterprise AI regulatory compliance platform
∙ Automated registration tracking
∙ EU AI Act database registration compliance

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.
▪ AAT is regarded as a technology and governed by the entity's existing IT governance practices.
▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide oversight of AAT-related activities. GRC functions are assigned to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.

Level 3 Well Defined

Compliance (CPL) 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 CPL 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 CPL domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain CPL domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., GRC 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 CPL 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 maintain a current registration for AAT with the appropriate governing body, as required by statutory or regulatory requirements.

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.