MS-2.11 Fairness and bias as identified in the MAP function is evaluated and results are documented
Fairness and bias – as identified in the MAP function – is evaluated and results are documented. Fairness evaluation states which fairness definition was applied and why, evaluates against it, and records the results inc
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
- The fairness definition or definitions applied and the reason for choosing them · Document repository
- Evaluation results disaggregated across the relevant groups · Document repository
- Identification of the groups assessed and the basis for that selection · Document repository
- Documentation of trade-offs where fairness definitions conflict · 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
- A single fairness metric applied with no argument that it fits the context
- Groups assessed limited to those for which attribute data happened to exist
- Disparity measured and documented with no decision recorded about it
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 sheetMS-2.10 Privacy risk of the AI system as identified in the MAP function is examined and documented · MS-2.12 Environmental impact and sustainability of AI model training and management activities as identified in the MAP function are assessed and documented