High-risk

Adopts the EU AI Act terminology for public-sector AI uses that affect an individual's legal status, significant interests or sensitive rights; such uses are subject to elevated risk assessment, conformity procedures and intensified oversight or safeguards under the taskforce's regulatory alignment work.

A functional, risk-based classification for AI systems whose failure or malfunction could materially impact safety, fundamental rights, or critical services, and which therefore trigger mandatory impact assessments, stricter testing and enhanced governance controls.

A working classification for AI applications whose use (based on context and impact) poses a substantial potential to harm safety, fundamental rights, economic wellbeing or the public interest; the paper frames this as context-dependent and invites concrete thresholds and criteria for categorisation.

AI systems deployed in contexts where their operation could substantially affect fundamental rights, health, safety, or critical public services; such systems are recommended to be subject to conformity assessment, incident reporting, and clear accountability measures.

High-risk AI refers to systems and application domains identified in the EU AI Act Annexes (for example certain HR tools, biometric identification, health or critical infrastructure systems) that trigger stricter conformity, documentation and oversight requirements. The Servicestelle’s sector-specific advisory and guidance explicitly target these high-risk categories to support compliance with associated obligations.

AI systems identified as posing significant risks to fundamental rights, democratic processes, or the rule of law; such designation triggers enhanced requirements (risk assessments, documentation, testing, transparency, and remediation) to mitigate potential harms.

AI systems identified as having the potential to significantly affect safety or fundamental rights; the draft adopts the EU-aligned classification principles to determine which applications are subject to stricter risk-management, conformity assessment and oversight measures. High-risk AI systems in the plan will inform priorities for regulation, monitoring, and implementing acts during transposition of the EU AI Act.

AI systems that meet the classification criteria set out by the EU AI Act and therefore attract stricter obligations and oversight; the committee uses this term to prioritise assignment of supervisory responsibilities and conformity assessment workflows in national implementation planning.

As referenced in the Coordinated Plan (and defined in the AI Act proposal), high-risk AI denotes systems that pose significant risks to health, safety or fundamental rights and therefore attract risk‑based legal obligations, conformity assessment procedures and intensified market surveillance.

A classification for AI systems whose deployment can materially affect fundamental rights, safety, or essential services; such systems are subject to stricter controls including risk assessments, registration, human oversight and conformity assessment in line with the EU AI Act framing.

AI systems whose failure, misuse, bias, or inaccuracy could materially and foreseeably cause serious harm to health, safety, fundamental rights, or public order; such systems are subject to mandatory risk assessments, conformity assessment, registration, and enhanced oversight obligations.

AI systems or use-cases identified as posing a heightened risk to safety, fundamental rights, or public interests; such systems trigger mandatory pre-deployment risk assessments, enhanced human oversight, third-party conformity assessment, registration/notification, and intensified monitoring and remediation obligations.

An AI system whose operation substantially affects decisions that have significant impacts on individuals or entities; such systems trigger heightened oversight, approval, and mitigation requirements under the Act. High-risk designation is based on the system's potential to affect legal rights, access to government services, or impose costs on citizens or businesses.

An AI system classified as having the potential to significantly affect fundamental rights, health, safety, or public order; such systems are subject to prescriptive obligations including mandatory risk assessments, pre-deployment safety testing, conformity assessment, human oversight, transparency requirements, and enhanced monitoring.

AI systems that present substantial risk to safety, health, fundamental rights, or critical national infrastructure; such systems are subject to the Bill's stricter controls, including mandatory risk assessments, registration, conformity assessment, and enhanced oversight.

An AI system classified according to its potential impact on fundamental rights, public safety, essential services or national critical infrastructure; systems so designated are subject to enhanced compliance measures under the strategy (such as registration, mandatory algorithmic impact assessments, audits and stricter oversight).

AI systems whose malfunction, bias, or failure could materially affect fundamental rights, safety, health, or the functioning of critical services; these systems are subject to enhanced obligations such as technical documentation, third‑party conformity assessment, registration and stricter monitoring.

AI systems used in sensitive or safety-critical contexts—such as healthcare, finance, and public safety—that are subject to enhanced evaluation, stricter criteria, and greater oversight due to the elevated potential for significant harm.

A risk-category in the national AI risk-based framework (per the Artificial Intelligence Basic Act) that covers AI systems whose deployment may significantly affect fundamental rights, public safety, or critical services (e.g., traffic control, disaster management). High-risk AI requires heightened oversight, risk assessments, mitigation measures, and clear notices or warnings as mandated by applicable regulation.

Classes of AI systems identified by the draft as posing significant risks to safety, fundamental rights, access to essential services or other critical public interests; such systems are subject to mandatory registration, enhanced risk‑management, conformity assessment, and stricter supervisory controls.

A classification for AI activities or systems that have the potential to cause significant physical, economic, social or rights-related harm; such projects are subject to higher approval thresholds, enhanced monitoring, additional audits or co-supervision and stricter mitigation requirements within the sandbox.

AI systems that, if they malfunction, produce biased outputs, or fail, are likely to cause significant physical, psychological, economic, or societal harm; such systems are subject to enhanced assessment, monitoring, and mitigation measures under the notification.

An AI system assessed by the severity and likelihood of potential harms from its outputs or decisions, the scale of affected persons or systems, and the context of deployment (e.g., safety-critical use, decisions affecting legal rights, health, access to services, or essential economic functions); applies across the AI lifecycle and to AI as a component or stand‑alone product.

AI systems that, given their intended purpose, deployment context, or potential impacts, present significant risks to physical safety, fundamental rights, critical infrastructure, or generate substantial socio-economic harm; such systems are subject to mandatory impact assessments, stricter pre-deployment testing, registration, and conformity requirements under the Perpres.

AI systems whose deployment affects critical sectors or fundamental rights (for example healthcare diagnostics, biometric identification, or transportation safety), classified in line with evolving EU terminology to trigger heightened governance, oversight and sectoral regulatory requirements.

AI systems that have substantial potential to affect fundamental rights, safety, or public interests; examples include automated diagnostic tools, biometric identification systems, decision support for social benefits or immigration, and critical-infrastructure control systems. The draft makes these systems subject to stricter risk assessments, pre-deployment testing, and conformity procedures.

AI systems identified as carrying a substantial potential to affect safety or fundamental rights, based on criteria aligned with the EU AI Act; these systems require stricter controls, documentation, testing and conformity assessment to mitigate risks.

AI systems categorised as high‑risk because their failure, bias or misuse could materially impact safety, fundamental rights, critical infrastructure or essential services; such systems require elevated risk classification, testing, documentation and governance measures under the Guidelines.

AI systems whose operation or outputs have the potential to cause significant negative impacts on operations, the financial system, or individuals (for example affecting access to financial services, employee decisions, or processing of sensitive personal information). Such systems are subject to heightened controls, mandatory prior approval, and additional reporting and validation requirements under the Guideline.

AI systems identified as having potential for significant impact on fundamental rights or public safety; this working definition links such systems to heightened ethical, oversight and compliance requirements and anticipates alignment with EU-level definitions and national implementing rules.

AI systems designated as posing significant potential impact on health, safety, fundamental rights, or critical infrastructure; such systems are subject to pre-deployment conformity assessments, mandatory technical documentation and logging, registration, Fundamental Rights Impact Assessments, and post-market monitoring under the draft law.

AI systems designated as high‑risk are those applied in areas where failures or errors could seriously affect life, safety, fundamental rights, or public order (e.g., healthcare, finance, employment, public administration, critical infrastructure). Operators of high‑risk AI are subject to enhanced obligations such as risk management, documentation, prior notice, and stricter conformity pathways.

A risk-classification aligned with the EU AI Act identifying AI systems that pose significant risks to health, safety, fundamental rights or critical functions (e.g., healthcare, HR selection, biometric identification, law enforcement); such systems are subject to enhanced oversight, conformity requirements and preparatory market surveillance.