Product · live application

What is in the application, screen by screen.

Six screens from the demo workspace: a fictional Belgian fintech with one credit-scoring model, classified high-risk under Annex III. Everything below runs today. The one thing that does not yet, the AI drafting, is marked as in build.

app.euridium.eu · Registry
The AI registryA system overview: risk classification and completenessObligations, article by articleThe evidence attached to one systemThe hash-chained audit trailThe Annex IV technical documentation
Live

01 · Registry

Every AI system, its regimes, its risk tier, its owner.

The inventory of systems and regulated subjects. Each row shows the frameworks that apply, the tier derived by the engine, the owner, the lifecycle stage and the readiness. A banner flags regulatory updates that touch its obligations; nothing changes on its own.

The AI registry
Live

02 · Classification

Why it is high-risk, in the regulation’s own words.

Annex I or Annex III, the Article 6(3) filter, Article 25 when a deployer becomes a provider, Article 2 exclusions. The rationale is written out. Two figures, never merged: obligations satisfied, and self-assessed maturity.

A system overview: risk classification and completeness
Live

03 · Obligations

Article by article, with the proof expected.

Why it exists, when it is met, the action, the evidence expected, the ISO 42001 / 27001 mapping. “Compliant” is locked behind attached evidence and a signature; a one-person sign-off is marked as such.

Obligations, article by article
Live

04 · Evidence

Captured once, counted everywhere.

A policy, a supplier contract, a model card, a training-data sheet: each item is dated and attached to every obligation it supports. Twenty-five control families link the obligations of eight regimes.

The evidence attached to one system
Live

05 · Audit trail

Who did what, when, and proof nothing was altered.

Every action enters a chain of cryptographic hashes that anyone can verify. This is also what makes an AI-drafted file acceptable: the model proposes, the chain records who accepted what.

The hash-chained audit trail
Live

06 · The file

The Annex IV documentation, ready to hand over.

Section by section, tied to the obligations and the evidence behind it, exportable as PDF. Two sections are filled today from your assessment answers: system identity and classification, and the obligations covered. The AI drafting will fill the rest, each sentence citing the document it comes from.

The Annex IV technical documentation
In build · demo December 2026

The AI drafts each section from your documents, and cites the passage it used.

The model reads your policies, contracts and technical notes and fills the file section by section. Each sentence points to the passage it came from. If there is no source, the box stays empty and says which question to ask your team.

  • It never signs. “Compliant” stays locked behind attached evidence and a human signature.
  • It does not classify. Risk tiers stay deterministic, with the rationale written out, because a model’s output could not be audited.
  • Documents sent to the model are not used to train it. The processors are named. The AI features can be switched off for a customer that wants it.
Annex IV · §3Data and data governance

↳ training-data-sheet-v3.2.pdf · p. 2↳ model-risk-register · row 14

§3.4 · Bias monitoringNo source found in the uploaded documents. Question for the team: is post-deployment bias monitoring documented anywhere?
✓Signed · Head of Risk · 14 Sep 2026→ chain #0043

Audit trail

What the chain looks like.

Five entries from the demo workspace. Each block carries the hash of the one before it; change one entry and every later hash stops matching.

#0041 system.insert Lendora Score sha256 3f9a2c…e71d
#0042 evidence.attach Model risk register sha256 8b17e0…04ac
#0043 conformity.attest ART9-R1 · signed sha256 c4d8a1…9f22
#0044 document.generate Annex IV · draft sha256 61ff7b…b3e0
#0045 chain.verify 67 entries · verified ✓ chain intact

Compared

Against what companies use today.

EuridiumLaw firmSpreadsheetUS compliance platforms
Who reads the lawA catalogue written from the regulation, obligation by obligation, with the evidence each one expectsA lawyer, once, at their hourly rateWhoever built the spreadsheetA control framework translated from US norms
Who writes the fileToday: your team, against the obligations. Next: the AI, from your documents, every sentence sourcedThe lawyer, by handYouYou, against a checklist
When it is updatedWhen a document or a rule changes: only what is touched reopensWhen you pay againWhen someone remembersOn a control review cycle
What an auditor getsA dated, signed file with a verified hash chainA PDFA spreadsheetControl evidence, not the regulatory file
CertifiesNever. Readiness onlyNoNoSome issue a badge

A fair reading, not a scorecard. A law firm is the right answer for a contested question; a US platform is the right answer for SOC 2. Euridium is the answer for the EU regulatory file that nobody in the company has time to write.

Walk through it on a call.

Thirty minutes, screen shared, on the demo workspace or on a system of yours. Then a workspace, a first system, and the obligations that are actually yours.