AI GxP validation for regulated life sciences
AI Validation

GxP AI systems, validated per Annex 22.

Same as our validation-side AI validation service — surfaced here for AI-transformation buyers.

Quick chat on WhatsAppHuman review at every gateISO 9001 & 27001 certified
AI validationGxP AI validation
A controlled validation document in GxP Copilot
Signed deliverablesControlled and versioned
Human reviewAt every gate
In short

Validating AI differs from validating software in one decisive way: an AI system can degrade while every setting stays as approved, because live inputs drift from the data it was evaluated against. That is why the lifecycle adds a held-out evaluation set, production monitoring, periodic re-evaluation and a documented fallback to the usual validation activities.

Annex 22-aligned assurance
Model card + eval set
HITL policy + fallback

Outcomes you can expect

  • Annex 22-aligned assurance
  • Model card + eval set
  • HITL policy + fallback

AI Validation is delivered by our ai transformation practice. Where it saves time, the team uses our products: GxP Copilot for validation lifecycle work and TraceDraft for clinical documentation.

Explore related capabilities: AI Strategy, AI Governance, GenAI Adoption, AI Centre of Excellence (AI CoE).

AI Validation for the AI Transformation Buyer

AI validation in the context of an AI transformation programme addresses a different set of questions than the standalone GxP AI validation service. The transformation buyer is typically asking: how do we build a validation capability for AI systems as a repeatable organisational practice, rather than as a one-time project? How do we integrate AI validation into our AI delivery lifecycle so that new AI systems are validated as part of deployment, not as a separate compliance step afterward? And how do we handle the validation of AI systems that will evolve continuously — through model updates, prompt changes, and performance improvements — rather than remaining static after initial deployment?

The answer lies in building validation infrastructure at the programme level: a standard AI validation framework that can be applied to each new AI deployment; a model card template that captures the required documentation efficiently; a benchmark evaluation harness that can be re-run for each model version; a HITL policy template that can be instantiated for each specific use case; and a change control process for AI systems that is embedded in the AI delivery workflow rather than layered on top of it. Cybroscape's AI transformation practice builds this infrastructure once and then applies it systematically across the AI portfolio.

1Bounded intended useWhat the model does, and what it must not be used for
2A frozen evaluation setHeld-out data, version-controlled, agreed before testing
3A release gate that holdsAcceptance criteria set in advance, results recorded
4A person decides what mattersConsequential calls are made and signed by a named person
5Drift monitoring in productionInputs, outputs and overrides watched, with authority to suspend
6A fallback that actually runsThe process continues with the AI switched off
Annex 22 · consultation draft
The six parts of validating an AI system for GxP use. They map onto what the EU’s draft Annex 22 asks for. Annex 22 is still a consultation draft, not yet in force.
Have a system going live?Talk to a AI lead, or chat with us on WhatsApp.
AI validationGxP AI validationAI strategy life sciencesAI governanceGenAI adoptionAI Center of ExcellenceAI CoEAI validation servicesintelligent automationagentic AI systems

Sources

Primary documents referred to on this page, from their official publishers.

See it on your own system.

Bring a URS or a system. We show you the validation package it produces.

  • We reply within one business day
  • We run your URS live on the call
  • You get a clear plan and scope
Chat on WhatsApp

Talk to a AI lead

Four fields. The right specialist replies within one business day.

Your details stay private. We never share them.