MS-3.2 Risk tracking approaches are considered for settings where AI risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available
Risk tracking approaches are considered for settings where AI risks are difficult to assess using currently available measurement techniques or where metrics are not yet available. Where no adequate metric exists the ris
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
- Review of whether measurement has since become possible · Document repository
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Identification of risks for which adequate measurement techniques do not exist · Document repository
- The tracking approach adopted for each such risk · Document repository
- Any novel or qualitative measurement approaches trialled · Document repository
First move
Common gaps auditors find
- Hard-to-measure risks dropped from the register rather than tracked qualitatively
- Approach considered once and not revisited as techniques matured
- Absence of a metric reported as absence of risk
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-3.1 Approaches, personnel, and documentation are in place to regularly identify and track existing, unanticipated, and emergent AI risks based on factors such as intended and actual performance in deployed contexts · MS-3.3 Feedback processes for end users and impacted communities to report problems and appeal system outcomes are established and integrated into AI system evaluation metrics