### (7) while emissions trading will also apply to greenhouse gas emissions from road and maritime transport as well as buildings , the scope of regulation (eu) 2018/842 will be maintained. regulation (eu) 2018/842 will therefore continue applying to the greenhouse gas emissions from domestic navigation , but not to those from international navigation. greenhouse gas emissions of a member state within the scope of regulation (eu) 2018/842 to be taken into account for compliance checks will continue to be determined upon completion of inventory reviews in accordance with regulation (eu) 2018/1999 of the european parliament and the council34 . ### (7) the scope of regulation (eu) 2018/842 is maintained. greenhouse gas emissions of a member state within the scope of regulation (eu) 2018/842 to be taken into account for compliance checks will continue to be determined upon completion of inventory reviews in accordance with regulation (eu) 2018/1999 of the european parliament and the council34 .


### (13) the covid-19 pandemic has impacted the union’s economy and its level of emissions to a degree that cannot yet be fully quantified. on the other hand , the union is deploying its largest stimulus package ever , also having a potential impact on the level of emissions. due to those uncertainties , it is appropriate to review the emissions data in 2025 and , if necessary , readjust the annual emission allocations. ### deleted


### (14) it is therefore appropriate to update in 2025 the annual emission allocations for the years 2026 to 2030. this should be based on a comprehensive review of the national inventory data carried out by the commission in order to determine the average of the greenhouse gas emissions of each member state during the years 2021 , 2022 and 2023. ### deleted


### (16) in addition to that flexibility , a limited quantity of net removals and net emissions from land use , land-use change and forestry (‘lulucf’) may be taken into account for member states’ compliance under regulation (eu) 2018/842 (‘the lulucf flexibility’). in order to ensure that sufficient mitigation efforts are deployed until 2030 , it is appropriate to limit the use of the lulucf flexibility by separating the use of such flexibility into two separate time periods , each capped by a limit corresponding to half of the maximum amount of total net removals set out in annex iii to regulation (eu) 2018/842. it is also appropriate to bring the title of annex iii in line with the amendment to regulation (eu) 2018/841 carried out by commission delegated regulation (eu) 2021/268 of 28 october 202037 . as a consequence , there is no longer a need for regulation (eu) 2018/842 to provide for a legal basis allowing the commission to adopt delegated acts to amend the title of its annex iii. article 7(2) of regulation (eu) 2018/842 should therefore be deleted. ### deleted


### (17) considering , the introduction of a strengthened compliance regime in regulation (eu) 2018/841 as of 2026 , it is appropriate to abolish the deduction of the greenhouse gas emissions generated by each member state in the period from 2026 to 2030 in the land sector in excess of its removals. article 9(2) should therefore be amended accordingly. ### deleted


### (18) the setting of more ambitious targets under regulation (eu) 2018/841 will decrease the capacity of member states to generate net removals that can be used for compliance under regulation (eu) 2018/842. in addition , the split of the use of the lulucf flexibility into two separate time periods , will further limit the availability of net removals for the purpose of compliance with regulation (eu) 2018/842. as a result , some member states may face challenges in meeting their targets under regulation (eu) 2018/842 , while some member states , the same or other , may generate net removals that cannot be used for compliance with regulation (eu) 2018/842. as long as the union objectives as set out in article 3 of regulation (eu) 2021/1119 are met , in particular with regard to the maximum limit of the contribution of net removals , it is appropriate to create a new voluntary mechanism , in the form of an additional reserve , that will help adhering member states to comply with their obligations. ### deleted


### (1) in article 1 , “30%” is replaced by “40%”; ### (1) in article 1 , “30%” is replaced by “at least 40%”;


### 2. subject to the flexibilities provided for in articles 5 , 6 and 7 of this regulation and the adjustment pursuant to its article 10(2) and taking into account any deduction resulting from the application of article 7 of decision no 406/2009/ec , each member state shall ensure that its greenhouse gas emissions: ### deleted


### 3. the commission shall adopt implementing acts setting out the annual emission allocations for each member state for the years from 2021 to 2030 in tonnes of co2 equivalent in accordance with the linear trajectories set out in paragraph 2. ### deleted


### (5) article 7 is amended as follows: ### (5) article 7 is deleted.


### the title is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### additional use of net removals from lulucf ### additional , limited use of net removals from lulucf


### paragraph 1 is amended as follows: ### deleted


### (6) in article 9 , paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### article 8 ### "article 8


### (7) the following article is inserted: ### deleted


### (10) the title of annex iii is replaced by the following: ### (10) annex iii is deleted.


### (10) the title of annex iii is replaced by the following: ### deleted


### 7. welcomes the commitment of the undertaking to facilitate research and innovation activities to deliver an integrated european railway network by design , eliminating barriers to interoperability and delivering smart , sustainable , and resilient rail system to ensure a harmonised approach to the evolution of the single european rail area. ### 7. welcomes the commitment of the undertaking to facilitate research and innovation activities to deliver an integrated european railway network by design , eliminating barriers to interoperability and delivering smart , sustainable , and resilient rail system to ensure a harmonised approach to the evolution of the single european rail area so as to ensure connectivity throughout the union.


### 18. notes that , in 2021 , the staff turnover continued to be high with some staff members and one sne leaving the joint undertaking; notes that this was attributable , besides other aspects , to the fact that other union joint undertakings are in the position to offer temporary agent posts (ta) instead of contractual agent posts (ca); ### 18. notes that , in 2021 , the staff turnover continued to be high with some staff members and one sne leaving the joint undertaking; notes that this was attributable , besides other aspects , to the fact that other union joint undertakings are in the position to offer temporary agent posts (ta) instead of contractual agent posts (ca); calls for increased efforts in human resources to minimise staff turnover;


### 21. notes that , following the court’s observations , that the eu-rail agrees to pay its employer’s pension contributions in line with the calculation to be provided by the commission’s services , once de-jure aspects are ascertained; ### 21. notes that , following the court’s observations , that the eu-rail agrees to pay its employer’s pension contributions in line with the calculation to be provided by the commission’s services , once de-jure aspects are ascertained and calls for the commission to take steps to avoid similar issues in the future;


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework based on ethical principles in particular for the development , deployment and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. therefore , this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety , environment and fundamental rights and values including democracy and rule of law , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , deployment and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values , while minimising any risk of adverse and discriminatory impact on people. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to ensure a high level of protection of fundamental rights , health , safety and the environment , as well as the union values enshrined in article 2 of the treaty on european union (teu) , from harmful effects of the use of artificial intelligence systems in the union while enhancing innovation and improving the functioning of the internal market. this regulation lays down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , the placing on the market , the putting into service and the use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , the placing on the market , the putting into service and the marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety , fundamental rights , the environment and the union values enshrined in article 2 of the treaty on european union (teu) , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework for the design , development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence and of sustainable and green artificial intelligence in conformity with union values while minimising any risk of adverse and discriminatory impacts on people and adverse impacts on the environment. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety , and fundamental rights , and the protection of environment and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the design , development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework based on ethical principles in particular for the design , development , deployment , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety , environment and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation. ### (1) the purpose of this regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development , marketing and use of trustworthy artificial intelligence in conformity with union values. this regulation pursues a number of overriding reasons of public interest , such as a high level of protection of health , safety , the environment , and fundamental rights , and it ensures the free movement of ai-based goods and services cross-border , thus preventing member states from imposing restrictions on the development , marketing and use of ai systems , unless explicitly authorised by this regulation.


### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34. ### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. the regulation aims in particular to ensure full respect for the right to informational self-determination , privacy , data protection and protection against discrimination. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34.


### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 . ### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety , the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law , the environment and the union values enshrined in article 2 teu. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the development , the placing on the market , and the putting into service and the use of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34.


### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 . ### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as the protection of fundamental rights , health and safety , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the development , the placing on the market , putting into service and the use of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 .


### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 . ### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the design , development , use and uptake of sustainable and green artificial intelligence in the internal market aligned with the european green deal provisions , that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety , environment and climate change , food security and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council[33] , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament[34].


### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety and the protection of fundamental rights , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 . ### (5) a union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence based on ethical principles is therefore needed to foster the development , use and uptake of artificial intelligence in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of protection of public interests , such as health and safety , the environment and the protection of fundamental rights and values , including democracy and the rule of law , as recognised and protected by union law. to achieve that objective , rules regulating the development , the placing on the market and putting into service of certain ai systems should be laid down , thus ensuring the smooth functioning of the internal market and allowing those systems to benefit from the principle of free movement of goods and services. by laying down those rules , this regulation supports the objective of the union of being a global leader in the development of secure , trustworthy and ethical artificial intelligence , as stated by the european council33 , and it ensures the protection of ethical principles , as specifically requested by the european parliament34 .


### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the commission to amend that list. ### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded).


### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the commission to amend that list. ### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability to perceive , reason and act on machine and/or human-based inputs , to generate outputs such as content , hypotheses , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded).


### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the commission to amend that list. ### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). ai systems can be developed through various techniques using learning , reasoning or modelling , such as: machine learning approaches , including supervised , unsupervised and reinforcement learning , using a wide variety of methods including deep learning; logic- and knowledge-based approaches , including knowledge representation , inductive (logic) programming , knowledge bases , inference and deductive engines , (symbolic) reasoning and expert systems; statistical approaches , bayesian estimation , search and optimization methods.


### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the commission to amend that list. ### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the ordinary legislative procedure to amend that list.


### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the definition of ai system should be complemented by a list of specific techniques and approaches used for its development , which should be kept up-to–date in the light of market and technological developments through the adoption of delegated acts by the commission to amend that list. ### (6) the notion of ai system should be clearly defined to ensure legal certainty , while providing the flexibility to accommodate future technological developments. the definition should be based on the key functional characteristics of the software , in particular the ability , for a given set of human-defined objectives , to generate outputs such as content , predictions , recommendations , or decisions which influence the environment with which the system interacts , be it in a physical or digital dimension. this definition should be understood to exclude tools and software systems that are strictly limited to elementary arithmetic operations on datasets or descriptive data analysis. ai systems can be designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and be used on a stand-alone basis or as a component of a product , irrespective of whether the system is physically integrated into the product (embedded) or serve the functionality of the product without being integrated therein (non-embedded). the commission should take note of the ongoing developments on defining the artificial intelligence within key international organisations such as united nations educational , scientific and cultural organization , the organisation for economic cooperation and development , international standardization bodies and council of europe.


### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments. ### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety , the environment and fundamental rights and values such as democracy and the rule of law , a set of ethical principles and common normative standards for ai systems should be established. those principles and standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) , the european green deal (the green deal) and the joint declaration on digital rights of the union (the declaration) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international commitments


### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments. ### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , the environment and the union values enshrined in article 2 teu , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments.


### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments. ### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety , fundamental rights or the environment , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments.


### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments. ### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety , the environment and fundamental rights and values such as democracy and the rule of law , a set of ethical principles and common normative standards for ai systems should be established. those principles and standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) , the european green deal (the green deal) and the joint declaration on digital rights of the union (the declaration) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international commitments.


### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments. ### (13) in order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health , safety and fundamental rights , common normative standards for all high-risk ai systems should be established. those standards should be consistent with the charter of fundamental rights of the european union (the charter) , the european green deal (the green deal) and the joint declaration on digital rights of the union (the declaration) and should be non-discriminatory and in line with the union’s international trade commitments.


### (18) the use of ai systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. in addition , the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities. ### (18) the use of ai systems for remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly or privately accessible spaces , as well as online spaces , for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. technical inaccuracies of ai systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. this is particularly relevant when it comes to age , ethnicity , sex or disabilities. in addition , whether such systems are used in 'real-time' or post factum , there is little difference on the impact and the heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities. the placing or making available on the market , the putting into service or use of those systems should therefore be prohibited.


### (18) the use of ai systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. in addition , the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities. ### (18) the use of ai systems for remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly or privately accessible spaces is particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. such systems should therefore be prohibited.


### (18) the use of ai systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. in addition , the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities. ### (18) the use of ai systems for biometric or biometrics-based identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons , to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population , evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. in addition , the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities.


### (19) the use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited , except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations , where the use is strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest , the importance of which outweighs the risks. those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime , including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection , localisation , identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in council framework decision 2002/584/jha38 if those criminal offences are punishable in the member state concerned by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined in the law of that member state. such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. moreover , of the 32 criminal offences listed in the council framework decision 2002/584/jha , some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others , in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionate to highly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection , localisation , identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness , probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. ### (19) the use of biometric or biometrics-based systems that can be used for monitoring large numbers of persons , be it in public or private spaces , should therefore be prohibited.


### (20) in order to ensure that those systems are used in a responsible and proportionate manner , it is also important to establish that , in each of those three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations , certain elements should be taken into account , in particular as regards the nature of the situation giving rise to the request and the consequences of the use for the rights and freedoms of all persons concerned and the safeguards and conditions provided for with the use. in addition , the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to appropriate limits in time and space , having regard in particular to the evidence or indications regarding the threats , the victims or perpetrator. the reference database of persons should be appropriate for each use case in each of the three situations mentioned above. ### deleted


### (21) each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority of a member state. such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use , except in duly justified situations of urgency , that is , situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. in such situations of urgency , the use should be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions , as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the law enforcement authority itself. in addition , the law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible , whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier. ### (21) each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a judicial authority of a member state. such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use , except in duly justified situations of urgency , that is , situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. in such situations of urgency , the use should be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions , as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the law enforcement authority itself. in addition , the law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible , whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier.


### (21) each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority of a member state. such authorisation should in principle be obtained prior to the use , except in duly justified situations of urgency , that is , situations where the need to use the systems in question is such as to make it effectively and objectively impossible to obtain an authorisation before commencing the use. in such situations of urgency , the use should be restricted to the absolute minimum necessary and be subject to appropriate safeguards and conditions , as determined in national law and specified in the context of each individual urgent use case by the law enforcement authority itself. in addition , the law enforcement authority should in such situations seek to obtain an authorisation as soon as possible , whilst providing the reasons for not having been able to request it earlier. ### deleted


### (22) furthermore , it is appropriate to provide , within the exhaustive framework set by this regulation that such use in the territory of a member state in accordance with this regulation should only be possible where and in as far as the member state in question has decided to expressly provide for the possibility to authorise such use in its detailed rules of national law. consequently , member states remain free under this regulation not to provide for such a possibility at all or to only provide for such a possibility in respect of some of the objectives capable of justifying authorised use identified in this regulation. ### deleted


### (23) the use of ai systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric data. the rules of this regulation that prohibit , subject to certain exceptions , such use , which are based on article 16 tfeu , should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in article 10 of directive (eu) 2016/680 , thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. therefore , such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this regulation , without there being scope , outside that framework , for the competent authorities , where they act for purpose of law enforcement , to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in article 10 of directive (eu) 2016/680. in this context , this regulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under article 8 of directive 2016/680. however , the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement , including by competent authorities , should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this regulation. such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to it. ### deleted


### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be placed on the union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety and fundamental rights of persons in the union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade , if any. ### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be placed on the union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety and fundamental rights of persons or the environment in the union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade , if any.


### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be placed on the union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety and fundamental rights of persons in the union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade , if any. ### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be developed and deployed if they comply with certain mandatory requirements based on ethical principles. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests , democracy and the rule of law , as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety , the environment , and fundamental rights of persons , democracy and the rule of law in the union.


### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be placed on the union market or put into service if they comply with certain mandatory requirements. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety and fundamental rights of persons in the union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade , if any. ### (27) high-risk ai systems should only be developed and deployed if they comply with certain mandatory requirements based on ethical principles. those requirements should ensure that high-risk ai systems available in the union or whose output is otherwise used in the union do not pose unacceptable risks to important union public interests as recognised and protected by union law. ai systems identified as high-risk should be limited to those that have a significant harmful impact on the health , safety and fundamental rights of persons in the union and such limitation minimises any potential restriction to international trade , if any.


### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their intended purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the regulation. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems. ### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems


### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their intended purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the regulation. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems. ### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their intended purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health , safety or the fundamental rights of persons or the environment , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the regulation. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems.


### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their intended purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence and they are used in a number of specifically pre-defined areas specified in the regulation. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems. ### (32) as regards stand-alone ai systems , meaning high-risk ai systems other than those that are safety components of products , or which are themselves products , it is appropriate to classify them as high-risk if , in the light of their purpose , they pose a high risk of harm to the health and safety or the fundamental rights of persons , taking into account both the severity of the possible harm and its probability of occurrence. the identification of those systems is based on the same methodology and criteria envisaged also for any future amendments of the list of high-risk ai systems.


### (33) technical inaccuracies of ai systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. this is particularly relevant when it comes to age , ethnicity , sex or disabilities. therefore , ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems should be classified as high-risk. in view of the risks that they pose , both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversight. ### deleted


### (34) as regards the management and operation of critical infrastructure , it is appropriate to classify as high-risk the ai systems intended to be used as safety components in the management and operation of road traffic and the supply of water , gas , heating and electricity , since their failure or malfunctioning may put at risk the life and health of persons at large scale and lead to appreciable disruptions in the ordinary conduct of social and economic activities. ### (34) as regards the management and operation of critical infrastructure , it is appropriate to classify as high-risk the ai systems intended to be used as safety components in the management and operation of road traffic and the supply of water , gas , heating and electricity , since their failure or malfunctioning may put at risk the life and health of persons or the environment at large scale and lead to appreciable disruptions in the ordinary conduct of social and economic activities.


### (37) another area in which the use of ai systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. in particular , ai systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk ai systems , since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing , electricity , and telecommunication services. ai systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination , for example based on racial or ethnic origins , disabilities , age , sexual orientation , or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market , it is appropriate to exempt ai systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. if ai systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied , reduced , revoked or reclaimed by authorities , they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights , such as the right to social protection , non-discrimination , human dignity or an effective remedy. those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. nonetheless , this regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration , which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe ai systems , provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. finally , ai systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high-risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property. ### (37) another area in which the use of ai systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. in particular , ai systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk ai systems , since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing , electricity , and telecommunication services. ai systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination , for example based on racial or ethnic origins , disabilities , age , sexual orientation , or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. if ai systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied , reduced , revoked or reclaimed by authorities , they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights , such as the right to social protection , non-discrimination , human dignity or an effective remedy. those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. finally , ai systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high-risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property.


### (37) another area in which the use of ai systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. in particular , ai systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk ai systems , since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing , electricity , and telecommunication services. ai systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination , for example based on racial or ethnic origins , disabilities , age , sexual orientation , or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market , it is appropriate to exempt ai systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. if ai systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied , reduced , revoked or reclaimed by authorities , they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights , such as the right to social protection , non-discrimination , human dignity or an effective remedy. those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. nonetheless , this regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration , which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe ai systems , provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. finally , ai systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high-risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property. ### (37) another area in which the use of ai systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully participate in society or to improve one’s standard of living. in particular , ai systems used to evaluate the credit score or creditworthiness of natural persons should be classified as high-risk ai systems , since they determine those persons’ access to financial resources or essential services such as housing , electricity , and telecommunication services. ai systems used for this purpose may lead to discrimination of persons or groups and perpetuate historical patterns of discrimination , for example based on racial or ethnic origins , disabilities , age , sexual orientation , or create new forms of discriminatory impacts. considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market , it is appropriate to exempt ai systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use. natural persons applying for or receiving public assistance benefits and services from public authorities are typically dependent on those benefits and services and in a vulnerable position in relation to the responsible authorities. if ai systems are used for determining whether such benefits and services should be denied , reduced , revoked or reclaimed by authorities , they may have a significant impact on persons’ livelihood and may infringe their fundamental rights , such as the right to social protection , non-discrimination , human dignity or an effective remedy. those systems should therefore be classified as high-risk. nonetheless , this regulation should not hamper the development and use of innovative approaches in the public administration , which would stand to benefit from a wider use of compliant and safe ai systems , provided that those systems do not entail a high risk to legal and natural persons. finally , ai systems used to dispatch or establish priority in the dispatching of emergency first response services should also be classified as high-risk since they make decisions in very critical situations for the life and health of persons and their property or the environment.


### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety and fundamental rights , as applicable in the light of the intended purpose of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available , thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade. ### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety , fundamental rights , the environment and the union values enshrined in article 2 teu , as applicable in the light of the intended purpose or reasonably foreseeable use of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available , thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.


### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety and fundamental rights , as applicable in the light of the intended purpose of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available , thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade. ### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety , fundamental rights and more widely for the climate and the environment as applicable in the light of the intended purpose of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available , thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade.


### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety and fundamental rights , as applicable in the light of the intended purpose of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available , thus avoiding unjustified restrictions to trade. ### (43) requirements should apply to high-risk ai systems as regards the quality of data sets used , technical documentation and record-keeping , transparency and the provision of information to users , human oversight , and robustness , accuracy and cybersecurity. those requirements are necessary to effectively mitigate the risks for health , safety and fundamental rights , as applicable in the light of the purpose of the system , and no other less trade restrictive measures are reasonably available.


### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training , validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant , representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used. in particular , training , validation and testing data sets should take into account , to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used. in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in ai systems , the providers shouldbe able to process also special categories of personal data , as a matter of substantial public interest , in order to ensure the bias monitoring , detection and correction in relation to high-risk ai systems. ### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training datasets , and where applicable , validation and testing datasets , including the labels , shall be relevant , representative , up-to-date , and to the best extent possible , free of errors and complete. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used. in particular , data sets should take into account , to the extent required by the intended purpose , the foreseeable uses and reasonably foreseeable misuses of ai systems with indeterminate uses , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used.


### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training , validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant , representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used. in particular , training , validation and testing data sets should take into account , to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used. in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in ai systems , the providers shouldbe able to process also special categories of personal data , as a matter of substantial public interest , in order to ensure the bias monitoring , detection and correction in relation to high-risk ai systems. ### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training , validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant , representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used. in particular , training , validation and testing data sets should take into account , to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used. in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in ai systems , that is , to ensure algorithmic non-discrimination , the providers should be able to process also special categories of personal data , as a matter of substantial public interest , in order to ensure the bias monitoring , detection and correction in relation to high-risk ai systems.


### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training , validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant , representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used. in particular , training , validation and testing data sets should take into account , to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used. in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in ai systems , the providers shouldbe able to process also special categories of personal data , as a matter of substantial public interest , in order to ensure the bias monitoring , detection and correction in relation to high-risk ai systems. ### (44) high data quality is essential for the performance of many ai systems , especially when techniques involving the training of models are used , with a view to ensure that the high-risk ai system performs as intended and safely and it does not become the source of discrimination prohibited by union law. high quality training , validation and testing data sets require the implementation of appropriate data governance and management practices. training , validation and testing data sets should be sufficiently relevant , representative and free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose of the system. they should also have the appropriate statistical properties , including as regards the persons or groups of persons on which the high-risk ai system is intended to be used , with specific attention to the mitigation of possible biases in the datasets , that might lead to risks to fundamental rights or discriminatory outcomes for the persons affected by the high-risk ai system. in particular , training , validation and testing data sets should take into account , to the extent required in the light of their intended purpose , the features , characteristics or elements that are particular to the specific geographical , behavioural , contextual or functional setting or context within which the ai system is intended to be used , with specific attention to women , vulnerable groups and children. in order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in ai systems , the providers should be able to process also special categories of personal data , as a matter of substantial public interest , in order to ensure the bias monitoring , detection and correction in relation to high-risk ai systems.


### (48) high-risk ai systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons can oversee their functioning. for this purpose , appropriate human oversight measures should be identified by the provider of the system before its placing on the market or putting into service. in particular , where appropriate , such measures should guarantee that the system is subject to in-built operational constraints that cannot be overridden by the system itself and is responsive to the human operator , and that the natural persons to whom human oversight has been assigned have the necessary competence , training and authority to carry out that role. ### (48) high-risk ai systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons have agency over them by being able to oversee and control their functioning. for this purpose , appropriate human oversight measures should be identified by the provider of the system before its placing on the market or putting into service. in particular , where appropriate and at the very least where decisions based solely on the automated processing enabled by such systems produce legal or otherwise significant effects , such measures should guarantee that the system is subject to in-built operational constraints that cannot be overridden by the system itself and is responsive to the human operator , and that the natural persons to whom human oversight has been assigned have the necessary competence , training and authority to carry out that role.


### (51) cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that ai systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use , behaviour , performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third parties exploiting the system’s vulnerabilities. cyberattacks against ai systems can leverage ai specific assets , such as training data sets (e.g. data poisoning) or trained models (e.g. adversarial attacks) , or exploit vulnerabilities in the ai system’s digital assets or the underlying ict infrastructure. to ensure a level of cybersecurity appropriate to the risks , suitable measures should therefore be taken by the providers of high-risk ai systems , also taking into account as appropriate the underlying ict infrastructure. ### (51) cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that ai systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use , behaviour , performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third parties exploiting the system’s vulnerabilities. cyberattacks against ai systems can leverage ai specific assets , such as training data sets (e.g. data poisoning)or trained models (e.g. adversarial attacks or confidentiality attacks) , or exploit vulnerabilities in the ai system’s digital assets or the underlying ict infrastructure. to ensure a level of cybersecurity appropriate to the risks , suitable measures should therefore be taken by the providers of high-risk ai systems , also taking into account as appropriate the underlying ict infrastructure.


### (54) the provider should establish a sound quality management system , ensure the accomplishment of the required conformity assessment procedure , draw up the relevant documentation and establish a robust post-market monitoring system. public authorities which put into service high-risk ai systems for their own use may adopt and implement the rules for the quality management system as part of the quality management system adopted at a national or regional level , as appropriate , taking into account the specificities of the sector and the competences and organisation of the public authority in question. ### (54) the provider should establish a sound quality management system , ensure the accomplishment of the required conformity assessment procedure , draw up the relevant documentation , including the energy consumption and carbon intensity of the system and establish a robust post-market monitoring system. public authorities which put into service high-risk ai systems for their own use may adopt and implement the rules for the quality management system as part of the quality management system adopted at a national or regional level , as appropriate , taking into account the specificities of the sector and the competences and organisation of the public authority in question.


### (64) given the more extensive experience of professional pre-market certifiers in the field of product safety and the different nature of risks involved , it is appropriate to limit , at least in an initial phase of application of this regulation , the scope of application of third-party conformity assessment for high-risk ai systems other than those related to products. therefore , the conformity assessment of such systems should be carried out as a general rule by the provider under its own responsibility , with the only exception of ai systems intended to be used for the remote biometric identification of persons , for which the involvement of a notified body in the conformity assessment should be foreseen , to the extent they are not prohibited. ### (64) given the more extensive experience of professional pre-market certifiers in the field of product safety and the different nature of risks involved , it is appropriate to limit , during the first year of application of this regulation , the scope of application of third-party conformity assessment for high-risk ai systems other than those related to products. therefore , the conformity assessment of such systems should be carried out as a general rule by the provider under its own responsibility , with the only exception of ai systems to be used for the remote biometric identification of persons , for which the involvement of a notified body in the conformity assessment should be foreseen , to the extent they are not prohibited.


### (67) high-risk ai systems should bear the ce marking to indicate their conformity with this regulation so that they can move freely within the internal market. member states should not create unjustified obstacles to the placing on the market or putting into service of high-risk ai systems that comply with the requirements laid down in this regulation and bear the ce marking. ### (67) high-risk ai systems should bear the ce marking to indicate their conformity with this regulation so that they can move freely within the internal market as well as the energy efficiency and carbon intensity marking. member states should not create unjustified obstacles to the placing on the market or putting into service of high-risk ai systems that comply with the requirements laid down in this regulation and bear the ce marking and the energy efficiency and carbon intensity marking.


### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service. ### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof , sustainable and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems , with particular emphasis on the promotion of sustainable and green ai systems , under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service.


### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service. ### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate ethical safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service.


### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service. ### (71) artificial intelligence is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires novel forms of regulatory oversight and a safe space for experimentation , while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of appropriate and ethically justified safeguards and risk mitigation measures. to ensure a legal framework that is innovation-friendly , future-proof and resilient to disruption , national competent authorities from one or more member states should be encouraged to establish artificial intelligence regulatory sandboxes to facilitate the development and testing of innovative ai systems under strict regulatory oversight before these systems are placed on the market or otherwise put into service.