EU AI Act Article 14 · Autonomous Agents
AI Oversight
Article 14 requires meaningful human oversight of high-risk AI. The Act does not say what evidence of meaningful oversight looks like. OMEGA does.
Read →Solutions
Three regulatory frames where OMEGA produces the artifact a reviewer can read.
OMEGA is one schema. The frame depends on the regulator. Below, three frames where the gap between "what your system did" and "what the regulator needs to see" is widest.
FCA SMCR · Model Risk Governance
Financial Accountability
SMCR places personal accountability on named individuals. When the decision is delegated to a model, the evidence trail does not survive scrutiny. OMEGA produces a record built for it.
Read →21 CFR 820 · EU MDR
Engineering and Assurance
Design controls require traceability between requirement, design decision, and verification. When an AI/ML component is in the loop, the traceability typically breaks at the model boundary. OMEGA closes it.
Read →The common structure
Each frame uses the same 22-conjunct schema. The difference is which conjunct binds to which regulatory obligation:
- AI Oversight binds
P1(authority) andP1_Freshness(temporal validity) to the human-oversight requirement. - Financial Accountability binds
P1(authority) andP10(competence attestation) to the Senior Manager's Statement of Responsibilities. - Engineering and Assurance binds
P4(expectation),P4M(materiality), andP11(expectation update integrity) to design control and post-market update obligations.
The conjuncts are defined in the specification and proved necessary-and-sufficient for the schema in the Lean 4 proof.