Assess whether the hiring tool should be paused pending audit (a110f8)

SITUATION In a city using a hiring-screen algorithm, a business unit that already went live without a risk tier put training-data provenance questionnaire in play. Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools should decide whether the hiring tool should be paused pending audit without filling gaps training-data provenance questionnaire does not contain.

DECISION Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools in a city using a hiring-screen algorithm must choose Policy or governance breach, Model defect, Dual failure, Hold for the missing fact using training-data provenance questionnaire after a business unit that already went live without a risk tier. The question on that file is whether the hiring tool should be paused pending audit.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools can defend Policy or governance breach from training-data provenance questionnaire after a business unit that already went live without a risk tier in a AI Governance challenge. 2. Vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools cannot defend Policy or governance breach from training-data provenance questionnaire; Model defect is what the extract actually supports after a business unit that already went live without a risk tier. 3. A business unit that already went live without a risk tier never reached the population in training-data provenance questionnaire — reopen intake, do not close the hiring tool should. 4. Two facts in training-data provenance questionnaire after a business unit that already went live without a risk tier conflict for vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools; hold this Vendors and Agentic Systems file.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Reproduce the incident row in training-data provenance questionnaire and say whether it ever touched production data. 2. Split policy-or-governance failure from a model defect using prompts, outputs, and human edits in training-data provenance questionnaire. 3. Reproduce the incident row in training-data provenance questionnaire and say whether it ever touched production data. 4. For this AI Governance Vendors and Agentic Systems file, read training-data provenance questionnaire against a business unit that already went live without a risk tier and write the one fact that would move the hiring tool should 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 / Vendors and Agentic Systems packet (training-data provenance questionnaire after a business unit that already went live without a risk tier). The follow-on Vendors and Agentic Systems action is what vendor-diligence reviewer for AI tools does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.