Documents are not proof
A policy claim, a defined procedure, technical evidence, and an operational record do not provide the same strength of support.
COMPLIANCE EVIDENCE, NOT ANOTHER GRC
Give us your existing documentation. We tell you what you can actually prove.
Every finding stays traceable from requirement to fact to exact source.
Built and operated in Europe. Infrastructure and customer data are hosted and managed in Europe.
Source-linked evidence
Audit workspaceEU AI Act · v1.0.0
HR SCREENING · AUDIT #1042
Review requiredCompliance assessment
Fact completion82% · 23 of 28 facts3 pending review · 1 conflict
Assessment coverage71% · 10 of 14 rules4 rules currently blocked
Open review itemsLatest saved result
Operator override authorityfact.human_oversight.override_capability
2 values conflictInstructions for useArt. 13 · transparency
Needs reviewRisk controls monitoredArt. 9 · risk management
AcceptedA conflict needs a decision
THE EVIDENCE CHAIN
Corporate documents
Atomic facts + citations
Requirement findings
Human validation
THE EVIDENCE PROBLEM
Your systems store documents. They do not tell you what those documents prove.
Policies and supporting records are scattered across governance tools and repositories. Reviewers still have to find the relevant statement, judge its strength, connect it to a requirement, resolve inconsistencies, and explain the conclusion later. That manual reasoning is slow, difficult to reproduce, and easy to lose inside a conventional audit trail.
Evidence can disagree
Different sources can describe the same system, actor or control differently—and the inconsistency matters.
THE CERTAELIS APPROACH
Make the evidence inside your stack intelligent.
Keep the governance and document workflows your team already uses. Certaelis adds a reasoning layer between source material and regulatory conclusions, with a visible basis for every step.
Explore the workflowFROM DOCUMENTS TO GOVERNANCE EVIDENCE
A compliance evidence graph your reviewers can interrogate.
Certaelis connects each conclusion to the underlying facts, exact citations, applicable requirements, conflicts, review decisions, and saved assessment history.
01
Atomic provenance
Extract individual candidate facts from existing PDFs and keep the supporting quote, document, and page attached.
Trace every claim back to its exact source.02
Requirement-level reasoning
Use source-linked facts to prefill applicable EU AI Act requirements while keeping missing support visible for review.
See what the evidence supports—and what it does not.03
Conflicts, made explicit
Surface contradictory candidate values and hold them out of the assessment until a reviewer records a resolution.
Turn ambiguity into a documented decision.04
Reproducible history
Keep saved findings tied to their regulatory release, source evidence, review status, and documented decisions.
Reconstruct the basis of a historical assessment.HOW IT WORKS
Documents in. Auditor-ready evidence out.
The reasoning chain stays explicit from source material to atomic facts, applicable requirements, human approval, and the saved result.
- STEP 01
Supply existing documentation
Start an audit under a selected regulatory release, then add relevant policies, procedures, contracts, technical files, and governance records as PDFs.
Input: the documentation you already maintain - STEP 02
Extract atomic facts
The extraction workflow identifies individual candidate facts and returns exact source quotes, document references, page locations, and warnings.
Output: atomic facts with provenance - STEP 03
Map facts to requirements
Source-linked facts populate applicable article templates and assessment fields, while missing or insufficient information remains visible.
Output: requirement-level evidence - STEP 04
Approve human decisions
Reviewers accept, correct, or reject extracted values, compare conflicting sources, and record explicit decisions.
Output: a human-reviewed fact set - STEP 05
Produce a reviewable result
Evaluate applicable requirements and separate supported findings from partial coverage, missing facts, conflicts, and open review work.
Output: auditor-ready evidence and gaps
BUILT FOR TRACEABILITY
Built so every conclusion can be challenged.
Each step preserves the link between source documents, atomic facts, applicable requirements, contradictions, and human decisions. A reviewer can interrogate a finding all the way back to the exact citation behind it.
Guided system classification
Capture the facts needed to classify an AI system through a guided review. Certaelis organises the relevant information, supports the reviewer’s decision, and connects the resulting classification to the applicable EU AI Act obligations.
Atomic provenance
Provide PDF documents and let the extraction workflow identify candidate facts with source quotes and page references.
Human review built in
Accept, correct or reject extracted values before they are relied on in an assessment.
Conflict resolution
Compare contradictory candidate values, inspect their evidence and save a documented resolution.
Reproducible history
Keep saved findings tied to their regulatory release, source evidence, review status, and documented decisions.
Obligation-level findings
Assess applicable requirements individually and keep missing facts, conflicts and non-compliant findings visible.
Auditor-ready PDF export
Download a saved assessment result with its review sections in a portable report.
HUMAN OVERSIGHT
Automation with human accountability built in.
The platform prepares evidence-backed candidate values and assessment fields. It does not turn an AI-generated output into a final legal or compliance decision.
- Review the quote, document, and page behind an extracted fact.
- Correct a value when the source needs professional interpretation.
- Reject unsupported evidence before it shapes the assessment.
- Record the human decision and continue with a reviewed fact set.
Every answer remains under human control.
ACTIONABLE GAP ANALYSIS
See what you can prove—and what still needs work.
Move beyond a single score. Distinguish supported findings from partial coverage, missing facts, contradictory sources, and conclusions still waiting for human review.
- Covered requirements and reviewed evidence
- Partial coverage and blocked requirements
- Missing facts and evidence needs
- Conflicts requiring a reviewer decision
- Export a saved assessment result as a structured PDF
The result helps reviewers prioritise follow-up. It is not a compliance guarantee or an autonomous legal conclusion.
LATEST SAVED ASSESSMENT
EU AI Act · v1.0.0Governance gap analysis
Requirements in scope14
Ready for approval7
Need attention7
RequirementStatus and next review need
- Risk management controlsArticle 9Covered4 reviewed evidence items
- Technical documentationArticle 11Partially covered2 fields need follow-up
- Transparency informationArticle 13Missing evidenceRequired fact not found
- Human oversight controlsArticle 14Conflict detected2 sources disagree
- Accuracy monitoringArticle 15Awaiting human review3 extracted facts pending
Illustrative workspace data. Statuses use text and icons in addition to colour.
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Resolve contradictions before they become conclusions.
When documents disagree, Certaelis keeps each active candidate value and its source visible until a reviewer records an explicit resolution.
- 1 Documents are ingested.
- 2 Candidate evidence is extracted.
- 3 Contradictory values are surfaced.
- 4 A reviewer compares the sources.
- 5 The resolution and rationale are saved.
Interface content is illustrative and contains no customer data.
ARTICLE 14 · HUMAN OVERSIGHT
Needs resolutionAbility to override or disregard outputs
Can oversight personnel decide not to use the system or to disregard, override, or reverse its outputs?
Conflicting extracted values2 active candidate values
Select the value supported by the audit evidence.
No candidate is used by compliance while this conflict is unresolved.
Resolution rationale Optional
Procedure confirmed by the control owner for this review period.
Save resolutionCancel edits
BUILT FOR ASSESSMENT WORK
An evidence layer for the governance work you already run.
Support internal governance teams and external reviewers with a traceable path from supplied documentation to findings—without asking them to replace established GRC and document workflows.
FOR COMPANIES USING OR PROVIDING AI
Make the evidence inside your governance stack intelligent.
Give legal, compliance, risk, and system owners a shared way to prepare internal or external assessments without losing the source behind a conclusion.
- Centralise audit evidence around each AI system
- Understand missing facts and requirement-level findings
- Keep review decisions and regulatory context visible
- Revisit saved assessments as governance work evolves
FOR AUDIT & CONSULTING FIRMS
Give reviewers a finding they can interrogate.
Use a consistent, structured workflow to review supplied documents, focus professional judgment where it matters, and deliver clearer findings.
- Reduce repetitive evidence searches and data entry
- Review source-linked facts efficiently
- Apply a consistent assessment process
- Export a selected result for client review
REPRODUCIBLE HISTORY
Reconstruct exactly why a finding was reached.
Each audit is tied to the immutable regulatory release selected when classification begins. That basis flows through extraction, requirement mapping, human review, and the saved assessment result.
Clear assessment basisSee the release ID used for the audit.
Immutable history preservedNewer releases do not reinterpret saved results.
Regulatory content recordedSee which release and content were used for a saved result.
REGULATORY VERSION
Locked for this auditEU AI Act · release 1.0.0
Inherited from classification and retained with the saved assessment result.
- Release ID
eu-ai-act@1.0.0- Assessment assets
templates/1.0.0- Content verification
Recorded · 7b3f…a91c
Historical basis retainedA later release does not reinterpret this saved result.
Version traceability supports review; it does not guarantee compliance.
PLANS & PRICING
Start with the workflow your reviews require.
Plans and pricing are being shaped around the scope, frequency, and collaboration needs of real assessment teams.
EARLY ACCESS
Tell us how your assessment work is organised.
We’ll use that conversation to understand the right access model for individual reviews, recurring team work, or wider governance programmes.
No purchase is required to discuss your workflow.
QUESTIONS, ANSWERED
The practical details.
Certaelis supports structured review. It does not turn an automated output into professional advice.
Discuss your workflow01What is Certaelis?
Certaelis is a compliance evidence workspace for EU AI Act reviews. It turns supplied PDFs into atomic, source-linked facts, maps them to applicable requirements, surfaces missing or contradictory evidence, records human decisions, and exports saved results for review.
02Who is it designed for?
It is designed for people involved in assessing AI systems: legal and compliance professionals, AI governance or risk teams, external advisors, and the product or control owners who provide the underlying facts and evidence.
03What documentation can I provide?
The current extraction workflow accepts relevant PDF documents supplied as audit evidence. These may include policies, procedures, contracts, technical documentation, governance records, and risk documentation. Direct document-repository integrations are not yet available.
04How does the platform reduce manual work?
It identifies candidate facts in supplied documents, connects those facts to source evidence, and prefills selected assessment templates. Reviewers can focus on checking evidence, resolving conflicts, and making decisions instead of repeatedly searching and copying.
05Does the AI make the final compliance decision?
No. Extracted values can be accepted, corrected, or rejected, and conflicting evidence can be escalated for resolution. The product is designed to support a qualified reviewer, not remove that reviewer from the process.
06How are conflicts handled?
When candidate values disagree, the platform presents the active values with their evidence. A reviewer can select a supported candidate or enter a different value, document the rationale, save the resolution, and revisit its history.
07What does regulatory versioning preserve?
An audit keeps the regulatory release selected during classification, along with a record of the regulatory content used. A later release therefore does not reinterpret a historical result. Versioning provides traceability; it does not guarantee compliance.
08Can I export an assessment?
Yes. A saved assessment result can be downloaded as a PDF, including sections for items needing review, conflicts, missing facts, and non-compliant findings.
09How will pricing work?
Plans and pricing are being finalised around the needs of early users. Book a demo to discuss the scope and frequency of your assessment work.
10How can I book a demo?
Submit the demo form below with a short description of your workflow. If requests are temporarily closed, the page will say so before collecting any details.
BOOK A DEMO
Give us your documentation. See what it can actually prove.
Tell us about the evidence-heavy reviews you run and the documentation your team already maintains.
No purchase required Human review built in
Professional review remains essential. AI-generated and system-generated outputs should be reviewed by a qualified person. Certaelis does not automatically provide legal, accounting, compliance, regulatory or other professional advice.