--- authoritative: false representation: annotated-page publisher: AstroKube methodology: https://ai-act.astrokube.com/about/ source_verified_on: '2026-09-15' site_content_updated_on: '2026-09-15' title: 'Article 4: AI literacy | EU AI Act | AstroKube' description: 'Article 4, EU AI Act: 1. Providers and deployers of AI systems shall take measures to support the development of AI literacy of their staff and other…' language: en source: https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/ --- 1. [Start](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/) 2. [The law](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/) 3. Article 4 Chapter I · GENERAL PROVISIONS # Article 4 — AI literacy ⟲ Amended · Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 ▼ Primary text, verbatim. Our annotations appear below, visibly separated. [1\.](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/#p-1) Providers and deployers of AI systems shall take measures to support the development of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf, taking into account their technical knowledge, experience, education and training and the context the AI systems are to be used in, and considering the persons or groups of persons on whom the AI systems are to be used. This obligation does not require providers or deployers to guarantee any specific level of AI literacy of any individual. [2\.](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/#p-2) The Commission and the Member States shall support and facilitate the efforts of providers and deployers of AI systems, in particular SMEs, in fulfilling their obligation under paragraph 1 of this Article. For that purpose, the Commission shall publish practical examples of how to comply with that obligation on the single information platform referred to in Article 62(3), point (b). [3\.](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/#p-3) The Board shall adopt recommendations, taking into account European competence frameworks, to support the Commission and Member States in the promotion of AI literacy required under paragraph 1, including by setting out common objectives. This text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. The Union's institutions do not assume any liability for its contents. The authentic versions of the relevant acts, including their preambles, are those published in the Official Journal of the European Union and available in EUR-Lex. **Amended** — Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 Passages marked with the accent edge in the primary text were inserted or replaced by the amendment. Show the text as adopted, before the amendment The authentic 2024 text of this provision, shown for comparison. It no longer states the law. Providers and deployers of AI systems shall take measures to ensure, to their best extent, a sufficient level of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf, taking into account their technical knowledge, experience, education and training and the context the AI systems are to be used in, and considering the persons or groups of persons on whom the AI systems are to be used. ## What this means for you In your terms · AI literacy measures Expect internal training or guidance on the AI systems you build and operate. ## Obligations derived from this article [AI literacy measuresArt. 4](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?art=art-4) ## Scenarios that touch this provision ### A code assistant for your own engineers Illustrative Reading still settling An assistant suggests code in the editor and opens pull requests, running against a hosted model. ### Your role ProviderDeployer ### Where it lands Not classified In force 2 Aug 2026 ### Decided by No Annex III use case. The open question is Article 50(2), because the assistant generates text. What applies - [AI literacy measures](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-4-ai-literacy) - [Machine-readable marking of synthetic content](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-50-synthetic-marking) What you have to be able to produce - Content marking in the generation pipeline - Onboarding notes for AI-touching roles - Provenance-preservation test in CI - Team enablement plan for people operating AI systems What would change the answer - Article 50(2) does not apply to the extent a system performs an assistive function for standard editing or does not substantially alter the input data or its semantics. Whether a generated patch is assistive editing is exactly the line this exemption draws, and it is not settled. - Generated code that ships inside a product covered by Annex I harmonisation legislation is a question about that product, not about the assistant. - Use it to evaluate engineers rather than to help them and Annex III point 4(b) applies. [EU Art. 50(2)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-50/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Annex III, point 4(b)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/annex-iii/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 4](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Guidelines on Article 50 Commission interpretation](https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/guidelines-transparency-obligations-providers-and-deployers-ai-systems "Guidelines on transparency obligations for providers and deployers of AI systems (Article 50)") A scenario describes a system we made up, not yours. It is not a classification of your system and not legal advice. Pending review by a named legal reviewer. ### A customer-support chatbot on your public site Illustrative The same stack, pointed outward: a chatbot that answers customer questions, drafts replies and escalates to a human when it cannot answer. ### Your role ProviderDeployer ### Where it lands Any risk level In force 2 Aug 2026 ### Decided by Article 50(1): a system intended to interact directly with natural persons. The transparency duties attach without the system being high-risk. What applies - [Disclosing interaction with an AI system](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-50-interaction-disclosure) - [Machine-readable marking of synthetic content](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-50-synthetic-marking) - [AI literacy measures](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-4-ai-literacy) What you have to be able to produce - Content marking in the generation pipeline - Disclosure pattern in the design system - Onboarding notes for AI-touching roles - Provenance-preservation test in CI - Reusable disclosure component - Team enablement plan for people operating AI systems What would change the answer - If the bot decides access to an essential service rather than describing it, Annex III point 5 puts it in the high-risk tier. - Article 50(2) marking has an exemption where the system performs an assistive function for standard editing or does not substantially alter the deployer’s input. A bot that writes the answer is not editing yours. - Publishing its text as an article on a matter of public interest brings Article 50(4) into play, and that duty sits on the deployer. [EU Art. 50(1), (2)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-50/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Annex III, point 5](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/annex-iii/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 4](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Guidelines on Article 50 Commission interpretation](https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/guidelines-transparency-obligations-providers-and-deployers-ai-systems "Guidelines on transparency obligations for providers and deployers of AI systems (Article 50)") A scenario describes a system we made up, not yours. It is not a classification of your system and not legal advice. Pending review by a named legal reviewer. ### A product recommender in your storefront Illustrative A model ranks what each visitor sees, trained on browsing and purchase history. ### Your role ProviderDeployer ### Where it lands Not classified In force 2 Feb 2025 ### Decided by Ranking products is not an Annex III use case and not a safety component. What the system infers about people is what to watch. What applies - [AI literacy measures](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-4-ai-literacy) What you have to be able to produce - Onboarding notes for AI-touching roles - Team enablement plan for people operating AI systems What would change the answer - Price or risk-assess life and health insurance with it and Annex III point 5(c) applies; score creditworthiness and point 5(b) does. - Article 5 prohibits certain manipulative and exploitative practices outright. A recommender tuned to exploit the vulnerabilities of a specific group is a different object from one tuned to relevance. - Profiling turns the Article 6(3) escape hatch off for any Annex III system, so it matters what the model infers, not only what it displays. [EU Annex III, points 5(b), 5(c)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/annex-iii/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 5](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-5/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 6(3)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-6/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 4](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") A scenario describes a system we made up, not yours. It is not a classification of your system and not legal advice. Pending review by a named legal reviewer. ### A RAG assistant over internal documents, on a vendor model Illustrative You wrapped a vendor model in a retrieval layer over your own wiki and runbooks, and put it in front of your own staff. Nobody outside the company can reach it. ### Your role ProviderDeployer ### Where it lands Not classified In force 2 Feb 2025 ### Decided by No Annex III use case, and not a safety component under Article 6(1). Putting a system into service for your own use still makes you its provider under Article 3(11). What applies - [AI literacy measures](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-4-ai-literacy) - [Disclosing interaction with an AI system](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/explorer/?q=art-50-interaction-disclosure) What you have to be able to produce - Disclosure pattern in the design system - Onboarding notes for AI-touching roles - Reusable disclosure component - Team enablement plan for people operating AI systems What would change the answer - Point it at a decision the Act lists. The moment it screens candidates or scores people, Annex III applies and the answer changes completely. - Article 50(1) asks you to tell people they are interacting with an AI system unless that is obvious. For an internal assistant behind a login it usually is; write down why you concluded that. - Fine-tune the vendor model and you may become the provider of the modified model, with Chapter V duties for it. [EU Art. 3(1), (11)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-3/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 6](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-6/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Annex III](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/annex-iii/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 4](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") [EU Art. 50(1)](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-50/ "Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)") A scenario describes a system we made up, not yours. It is not a classification of your system and not legal advice. Pending review by a named legal reviewer. ## If you would rather not read the law The basics page explains the Regulation's own categories in order: scope, role, tier, date. The engineering view groups the obligations by the platform capability they demand. [Start with the basics →](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/basics/) [Open the engineering view →](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/engineering/) ## About this provision ### Status In force 2 Feb 2025 ### Regime Cross-cutting ### Binds ProviderDeployer ### Type Article · Chapter I ### Amended by [Regulation (EU) 2026/1744](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02024R1689-20260727) ### Cited capture regulation-2024-1689/en-2026-08-18.html sha256 8f0b656302f9864c… [Authentic text (EUR-Lex) →](http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj) [This version (EUR-Lex) →](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02024R1689-20260727) ### Machine readable [/law/art-4.md](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/law/art-4.md) [/api/law.json](https://ai-act.astrokube.com/api/law.json) ### Found an error? [Write to us →](https://astrokube.com/contact)