Third GPAI Signatory Taskforce meeting – Safety and Security chapter
The EU GPAI Code of Practice is setting concrete frontier AI risk assessment norms that may influence Australian expectations of major AI vendors.
Key points
- EU AI Office's GPAI Signatory Taskforce met in March 2026 to work through Safety and Security Chapter implementation details.
- Discussions covered aggregate risk forecasting by frontier model providers and risk scenario frameworks for harmful manipulation evaluations.
- Limited direct APS applicability; useful context for agencies tracking international frontier AI governance as it matures.
Implications for Australian agencies
- Monitor Policy teams tracking frontier AI governance may want to monitor the GPAI Code of Practice as it crystallises concrete risk assessment and forecasting obligations for major AI providers.
- Consider Agencies assessing systemic risk from GPAI models in procurement or deployment contexts could consider how the EU's risk scenario frameworks compare to current Australian evaluation approaches.
Implications are AI-generated. Starting points, not advice — see methodology for how they're framed.
View original source
Copied.
Appeared in:
Weekly digest, 4 May 2026
"Third GPAI Signatory Taskforce meeting – Safety and Security chapter"
Source: EU Digital Strategy – News
Published: 27 April 2026
URL: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/third-gpai-signatory-taskforce-meeting-safety-and-security-chapter
The third meeting of the EU AI Office's GPAI Code of Practice Signatory Taskforce focused on two Safety and Security Chapter measures: aggregate risk-tier forecasting by systemic-risk GPAI providers, and risk scenario development for harmful manipulation evaluations. On forecasting, the Taskforce discussed structured, semi-annual or annual exercises where providers would individually answer standardised risk forecast questions, with responses then aggregated and anonymised. On harmful manipulation, the session explored how to categorise risk scenarios by exposure context — chatbot, third-party application, agentic system, or disseminated AI-generated content — to make model evaluations more targeted and informative. The AI Office will issue a concrete forecasting approach following the discussion.
Implications for Australian agencies:
- [Monitor] Policy teams tracking frontier AI governance may want to monitor the GPAI Code of Practice as it crystallises concrete risk assessment and forecasting obligations for major AI providers.
- [Consider] Agencies assessing systemic risk from GPAI models in procurement or deployment contexts could consider how the EU's risk scenario frameworks compare to current Australian evaluation approaches.
Retrieved from SIMS, 18 July 2026.