Assess whether a shadow system must be decommissioned this quarter (1c96ea)

Situation

Bias and Training Data work in a bank preparing for a model-risk exam now turns on a shadow system must because a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased put EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet in play. Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools should say what EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet proves.

Decision

Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools in a bank preparing for a model-risk exam must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet after a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased.

Hypotheses to test

• A journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased is noise around an already-controlled Bias and Training Data process in a bank preparing for a model-risk exam, given EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet.
• A journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased is the event in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet that forces Policy or governance breach for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools under AI Governance.
• EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet shows a one-file miss after a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased, not a Bias and Training Data program failure.
• EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet cannot decide a shadow system must yet after a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased; hold is the only AI Governance close a bank preparing for a model-risk exam can defend.

Analysis required

• Walk the model input/output path recorded in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet and mark each hop approved, shadow, or unlogged.
• Verify data provenance and the human-oversight gate vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools can actually point to.
• Walk the model input/output path recorded in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet and mark each hop approved, shadow, or unlogged.
• For this AI Governance Bias and Training Data file, read EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet against a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased and write the one fact that would move a shadow system must for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools.

Recommendation

Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance / Bias and Training Data packet (EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet after a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased). If EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet cannot force a AI Governance label under Bias and Training Data, stop. If EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet after a journalist asking if the hiring tool is biased cannot support Policy or governance breach versus Model defect on this AI Governance Bias and Training Data close, vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools must leave the classification unresolved and name the missing control or provenance fact.

Command returns

• Bottom-line AI Governance option on a shadow system must, then the evidence in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet, then the action for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools
• Hypothesis scorecard against EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet: supported / rejected / untestable
• Regulatory or exam hook Bias and Training Data would cite
• Bias and Training Data finding in EU AI Act high-risk classification worksheet that a second reviewer can re-perform