Platform / Independent review

Ask a specialist to review a defined, frozen record.

Independent review is most useful when the reviewer sees a stable body of facts, knows the exact question being asked and can state the limits of the opinion.

Product demonstration · 2 minutes 41 seconds

External AI assurance

See supplier questionnaires, buyer assurance, corrective actions and time-limited specialist review in a hypothetical workspace. All organisations, people and systems shown were created for demonstration, and no client data appears.

Read the video transcript

AI governance does not stop at the edge of the organisation. EU AI Fit connects suppliers to the systems and components that depend on them. A secure questionnaire lets a supplier respond without entering the client workspace, and the response remains pending until an authorised reviewer checks it.

The reviewer records available evidence, gaps, conditions, actions and a reassessment date. Buyer assurance has a different purpose: each answer is tied to a system, owner and evidence reference, then reviewed before a locked response pack is supplied.

Where additional judgement is needed, an independent specialist receives a frozen snapshot rather than unrestricted access. Credentials, independence, sources, decisions, limitations and attestation are retained. Material change makes the opinion visibly out of date instead of silently rewriting history.

Why this matters

A casual email opinion is difficult to scope, preserve or revisit.

A reviewer needs to know which facts and version they considered. The organisation needs to distinguish requested corrections from the final conclusion and understand when a later change makes that conclusion stale.

EU AI Fit freezes the review record, provides a secure 30-day link, retains the specialist's credentials, sources, decision and attestation, and flags material changes.

Who it is for

The owner, internal reviewer and specialist need a common, stable scope.

  • System owners seeking additional assurance
  • Internal reviewers escalating uncertain classifications
  • Qualified legal, regulatory and technical specialists
  • Advisers coordinating controlled client review

How the work moves

Freeze the question, capture the opinion and preserve its limits.

  1. 01

    Define the question

    Choose the system, assessment and precise decision that requires independent review.

  2. 02

    Freeze the record

    Preserve the facts, rationale, evidence index and rule version supplied to the reviewer.

  3. 03

    Review securely

    Issue a time-limited link for the specialist to record credentials, sources, corrections and decision.

  4. 04

    Retain and monitor

    Keep the attestation with its scope and mark it out of date when material facts change.

In this scenario

A borderline employment classification needs external judgement

The internal team has documented a proposed conclusion but remains uncertain about how the use affects employment decisions.

The specialist reviews the frozen intended-purpose statement, workflow, answers and cited provisions rather than an evolving live page.

They request one correction, record the basis of their final opinion and attest to the scope reviewed. A later purpose change makes the opinion visibly stale.

The workspace preserves what was reviewed and avoids presenting an old opinion as current certification.

What is retained

An opinion tied to the exact record the specialist saw.

A secure review invitation controls the scope, corrections, attestation and currentness of the opinion.

  • Frozen review snapshot and evidence index
  • Reviewer identity and relevant credentials
  • Corrections and organisation response
  • Sources, scoped decision and attestation
  • Material-change and currentness status
Discuss specialist review

Source basis

The official material behind the workflow.

Source review updated 31 August 2026. Read our editorial and regulatory review policy, check the current source and obtain qualified advice for your circumstances.

Next step

Give the specialist a record worth reviewing.

Scope the question, freeze the facts and retain an opinion whose limits remain visible.

Discuss independent review