EvidenceSheet

MP-2.3 Scientific integrity and TEVV considerations are identified and documented, including those related to experimental design, data collection and selection, system trustworthiness, and construct validation

Scientific integrity and TEVV considerations are identified and documented, including those related to experimental design, data collection and selection (e.g., availability, representativeness, suitability), system trus

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
0
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Documented experimental design for evaluation of the system · Document repository
  • Data collection and selection decisions, with availability, representativeness and suitability addressed · Document repository
  • Construct validation showing the metric stands for the property claimed · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • The TEVV considerations identified and how each is handled · Document repository

First move

This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

MP-2.2 Information about the AI system's knowledge limits and how system output may be utilized and overseen by humans is documented · MP-3.1 Potential benefits of intended AI system functionality and performance are examined and documented