Pdf ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Files - Relevant ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Answers

Blog Article

Tags: Pdf ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Files, Relevant ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Answers, ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Exam Fees, ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Actualtest, Clear ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Exam

The user-friendly interface of ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Dumps (desktop & web-based) will make your preparation effective. The Test4Engine ensures that the ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor practice exam will make you competent enough to crack the in-demand ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor examination on the first attempt. Real PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor dumps of Test4Engine come in PDF format as well.

PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Exam Syllabus Topics:

Topic	Details
Topic 1	AI management system requirements: This section of the exam measures the skills of a Lead Auditor and focuses on understanding the key requirements outlined in ISO IEC 42001. It explains how organizations should structure their AI-related activities and processes to meet compliance standards effectively.
Topic 2	Fundamental audit concepts and principles: This section of the exam measures the skills of a Lead Auditor and outlines essential audit concepts such as evidence collection, impartiality, objectivity, and ethical conduct. It introduces the core principles that form the foundation of a reliable and consistent auditing process.
Topic 3	Fundamental principles and concepts of an AI management system: This section of the exam measures the skills of an AI Compliance Officer and covers the basic principles of artificial intelligence, including ethical use, trustworthiness, and transparency. It introduces the purpose and importance of having an AI management system in place for responsible AI governance.
Topic 4	Managing an ISO IEC 42001 audit program: This section of the exam measures the skills of an AI Compliance Officer and deals with overseeing an entire audit program. It involves managing multiple audits, tracking audit performance, and aligning audit outcomes with broader organizational goals related to AI governance.
Topic 5	Conducting an ISO IEC 42001 audit: This section of the exam measures the skills of a Lead Auditor and focuses on executing the audit according to ISO IEC 42001 guidelines. It includes collecting evidence, interviewing relevant staff, and evaluating compliance with the AI management system standards.
Topic 6	Preparing an ISO IEC 42001 audit: This section of the exam measures the skills of a Lead Auditor and covers how to plan and prepare for an AI management system audit. It includes creating audit plans, selecting team members, and setting clear objectives to ensure a smooth audit process.

>> Pdf ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Files <<

Pass Your PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Exam with Exams

According to the candidate's demand, Test4Engine will update PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor dumps. Test4Engine is a composite of top IT experts, certified trainers and competent authors for PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor exam. They collate the braindumps, guarantee the quality! No matter how the times change, Test4Engine good quality will never change. After the majority of candidates purchase our products, they passed PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Certification Exam, which indicates Test4Engine has high quality.

PECB ISO/IEC 42001:2023Artificial Intelligence Management System Lead Auditor Exam Sample Questions (Q35-Q40):

NEW QUESTION # 35
Scenario 2 (continued):
Empsy HR Solutions is a human resources consulting company that provides innovative HR solutions to diverse industries.Recognizing the significant impact of artificial intelligence Al in HR processes, including its ability to automate repetitive tasks, analyzevast amounts of data for insights, improve recruitment and talent management strategies, and personalize employee experiences, thecompany has initiated the implementation of an artificial intelligence management system AIMS based on ISO/IEC 42001.
Initially, the top management established an Al policy that was aligned with the company's objectives. The Al policy provided a frameworkfor defining Al objectives, a commitment to meeting relevant requirements, and a dedication to continually improve the AIMS. However, it did not refer to other organizational policies, although some were relevant to the AIMS. Afterward, the top management documented thepolicy, communicated it internally, and made it accessible to interested parties.
The top management designated specific individuals to ensure that the AIMS meets the standard's requirements. Additionally, theyensured that these individuals were responsible for overseeing the AIMS, reporting its performance to the top management, andfacilitating continual improvement. Moreover, in its awareness sessions, the company focused exclusively on ensuring that all personnel were informed about the Al policy, emphasizing their role in ensuring the effectiveness of the AIMS and the benefits of enhanced Alperformance.
The company also planned, implemented, and monitored processes to meet AIMS requirements. Additionally, it set clear criteria andimplemented controls based on them, ensuring effective operation, alignment with organizational objectives, and continual improvement.Empsy HR Solutions decided to implement strict measures to control changes to documented information within the AIMS. To ensure theintegrity and accuracy of documentation, the company adopted version control practices. Each document update was tracked using aversioning system, with clear records of what was modified, who made the changes, and when the updates occurred. Access to makechanges was restricted to authorized personnel, and any proposed modifications required approval from the designated managementteam before being implemented.
Moreover, considering past experiences where the company encountered unforeseen risks, Empsy HR Solutions established acomprehensive Al risk assessment process. This process involved identifying, analyzing, and evaluating Al risks to determine if it isnecessary to implement additional controls than those specified in Annex A. The company also referred to Annex B for guidance onimplementing controls and, ultimately, produced a Statement of Applicability SoA. The SoA contained the necessary controls, including allthe controls of Annex A and justifications for their inclusion or exclusion.
Lastly. Empsy HR Solutions decided to establish an internal audit program to ensure the AIMS conforms to both the company'srequirements and ISO/IEC 42001. It defined the audit objectives, criteria, and scope for each audit, selected auditors, and ensuredobjectivity and impartiality during the audit process. The results of the first audit were documented and reported only to the top management of the company.
Question:
According to Scenario 2, were the risks addressed in accordance with the ISO/IEC 42001 requirements?

A. No, the company must also establish a risk treatment process
B. No, the risks should be evaluated and treated and then analyzed
C. Yes, risks only need to be identified for certification
D. Yes, the risks were identified, analyzed, and evaluated

Answer: A

Explanation:
ISO/IEC 42001 Clause 6.1.2 requires that risks must not only be identified, analyzed, and evaluated but also treated appropriately. In Scenario 2, Empsy HR Solutions identified and evaluated risks butdid not establish a risk treatment process, violating ISO/IEC 42001 requirements.
Reference:ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 6.1.2 (Actions to Address Risks and Opportunities).

NEW QUESTION # 36
Scenario 4 (continued):
BioNovaPharm, a German biopharmaceutical company, has implemented an artificial intelligence management system AIMSbased on ISO/IEC 42001 to optimize various aspects of drug discovery, including analyzing extensive biological data, identifying potentialdrug candidates, and streamlining clinical trial processes. After having the AIMS in place for over a year, the company contracted acertification body and is now undergoing an AIMS audit to obtain certification against ISO/IEC 42001.
Adopting a risk-based approach, the audit team focused on risk throughout their activities. The level of detail outlined in the audit plancorresponded to the scope and complexity of the audit. The team employed a ranking system for detailed audit procedures, prioritizingthose with the highest risk.
Once the stage 1 audit began, the audit team started reviewing the auditee's documented information. To assess whether BioNovaPharmcomplies with the legal and regulatory requirements related to incident communication, the audit team examined evidence provided bythe company's external legal office. The evidence confirmed that BioNovaPharm applies the requirements of the EU Al Act, whichmandates that providers of high-risk Al systems report serious incidents to relevant authorities.
Following the completion of the stage 1 audit, John, an audit team member, documented the stage 1 audit outputs, including theobservations of the audit team that could result in nonconformities during the on-site audit. However, the audit team leader, Emma, whowas overseeing the audit activities, observed that John failed to document significant observations related to the lack of transparency inthe Al decision-making processes of BioNovaPharm. Considering that Emma observed John's lack of competence in undertaking some audit activities, a disciplinary note was recorded for John.
Question:
What level of negligence did Emma observe regarding John's audit documentation failures?

A. Fraud
B. Minor error
C. Gross negligence
D. Ordinary negligence

Answer: D

Explanation:
Ordinary negligencerefers to a failure to apply the level of care that a reasonable auditor would exercise, without intentional misconduct.
* ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 7.2.5 requires auditors todocument audit findings properly and completely.
* TheLead Auditor Study Guidedefines ordinary negligence as:"An auditor's unintentional oversight or failure to perform duties to expected professional standards, without evidence of deliberate wrongdoing." Reference:ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 7.2.5; Lead Auditor Manual Chapter 6 ("Audit Team Behavior and Ethics").

NEW QUESTION # 37
Scenario 8 (continued):
Scenario 8:
Scenario 8: InnovateSoft, headquartered in Berlin, Germany, is a software development company known for its innovative solutions andcommitment to excellence. It specializes in custom software solutions, development, design, testing, maintenance, and consulting,covering both mobile apps and web development.
Recently, the company underwent an audit to evaluate the effectiveness and compliance of its artificial intelligence management system AIMS against ISO/IEC 42001.
The audit team engaged with the auditee to discuss their findings and observations during the audit's final phases. After evaluating theevidence, the audit team presented their audit findings to InnovateSoft, highlighting the identified nonconformities.
Upon receiving the audit findings, InnovateSoft accepted the conclusions but expressed concerns about some findings inaccuratelyreflecting the efficiency of their software development processes. In response, the company provided new evidence and additionalinformation to alter the audit conclusions for a couple of minor nonconformities identified. After thorough consideration, the audit teamleader clarified that the new evidence did not significantly alter the core conclusions drawn for the nonconformities. Therefore, thecertification body issued a certification recommendation conditional upon the filing of corrective action plans without a prior visit.
InnovateSoft accepted the decision of the certification body. The top management of the company also sought suggestions from theaudit team on resolving the identified nonconformities. The audit team leader offered solutions to address the issues, fostering acollaborative effort between the auditors and InnovateSoft.During the closing meeting, the audit team covered key topics to enhance transparency. They clarified to InnovateSoft that the auditevidence was based on a sample, acknowledging the inherent uncertainty. The method and time frame of reporting and grading findingswere discussed to provide a structured overview of nonconformities. The certification body's process for handling nonconformities,including potential consequences, guided InnovateSoft on corrective actions. The time frame for presenting a plan for correction was communicated, emphasizing urgency. Insights into the certification body's post-audit activities were provided, ensuring ongoing support.
Lastly, the audit team briefed InnovateSoft on complaint and appeal handling.
InnovateSoft submitted the action plans for each nonconformity separately, describing only the detected issues and the correctiveactions planned to address the detected nonconformities. However, the submission slightly exceeded the specified period of 45 days setby the certification body, arriving three days later.
InnovateSoft explained this by attributing the delay to unexpected challengesencountered during the compilation of the action plans.
InnovateSoft submitted corrective action plans for nonconformities three days past the certification body's deadline of 45 days.
Question:
Based on Scenario 8, is InnovateSoft eligible for certification?

A. No, the action plans were not submitted within the specified period
B. Yes, it is up to the auditee to decide when to submit the action plans
C. Yes, the submission of the action plans can be delayed for up to 10 days

Answer: C

Explanation:
While ISO/IEC 17021-1 does not prescribe a strict number of days, certification bodiestypically allow minor grace periods, e.g., 5-10 days, based on internal policy.
* ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.4.9requires that nonconformities must be addressedwithin a timeframe agreed by the certification body.
* If the delay is minor (e.g., 3 days), and the CB accepts it with justification, the certification process can still proceed.
* TheLead Auditor Manualnotes:"Minor extensions may be granted for corrective actions when justified and documented." Reference:ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.4.9; ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Auditor Guide - Section 8 ("Certification Decision Timelines").

NEW QUESTION # 38
Scenario 1 (continued):
To ensure the integrity of the AI system, Future Horizon Academy has implemented measures to ensure that training data remain isolated from data that could lead to harmful or undesirable outcomes. The institution adds significant data elements as metadata, transforms the data into a format usable by the AI system, and uses data from one or more trusted sources.
Committed to standardization and continual improvement, Future Horizon Academy decided to implement an artificial intelligence management system (AIMS) based on ISO/IEC 42001 that would help the institution increase operational efficiency, resulting in improved processes.
After having the AIMS in place for a year, the institution decided to apply for a certification audit to get certified against ISO/IEC 42001. Prior to the certification audit, the institution conducted an internal audit and management review to ensure that the AIMS aligns with the institution's own requirements and that the system is being maintained effectively.
Question:
Prior to the certification audit, the institution conducted an internal audit and management review. Is this acceptable?

A. No, the internal audit should be conducted after the certification audit to ensure any recommendations from the audit team are addressed
B. No, internal audits are only required for recertification audits
C. Yes, an internal audit and management review can be conducted before the certification audit
D. No, only an internal audit should be conducted before the initial audit

Answer: C

Explanation:
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 9.2 (Internal Audit) and Clause 9.3 (Management Review) require organizations toperform internal audits and management reviewsto ensure the system's continued suitability, adequacy, and effectivenessprior to certification audits.Reference:ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clauses 9.2 and 9.3.

NEW QUESTION # 39
A financial institution needs to develop a system that can understand and process large volumes of unstructured text data from financial reports to extract key information and insights. Which AI concept would be best suited for this task?

A. Computer Vision
B. Machine Learning (ML)
C. Deep Learning (DL)
D. Natural Language Processing (NLP)

Answer: D

Explanation:
The correct AI concept for processingtext dataisNatural Language Processing (NLP).
NLP is a field of AI concerned with theinteraction between computers and human (natural) languages. It is used to analyze, extract, and interpretunstructured text, making it highly suitable for financial document analysis.
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 - Clause 8.2.3encourages the selection of appropriate techniques for operational purposes, andNLP is the most relevantfor text-heavy tasks.
Reference: PECB Lead Auditor Guide - Domain 1: "AI Technologies and Use Cases," Table: "NLP for text processing" ISO/IEC 42001:2023 - Clause 8.2.3 (Operational Planning and Control)

NEW QUESTION # 40
......

The Test4Engine ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor exam software is loaded with tons of useful features that help in preparing for the exam efficiently. The ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor questions desktop ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor exam software has an easy-to-use interface. Test4Engine provides PECB certification exam questions for desktop computers. Before purchasing, you may try a free demo to see how it gives multiple PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Questions for PECB certification preparation. You may schedule the PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor questions in the ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor exam software at your leisure and keep track of your progress each time you try the PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor questions, which preserves your score. However, it is only compatible with Windows.

Relevant ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Answers: https://www.test4engine.com/ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor_exam-latest-braindumps.html

Report this page

PDF ISO-IEC-42001-LEAD-AUDITOR FILES - RELEVANT ISO-IEC-42001-LEAD-AUDITOR ANSWERS

Pdf ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Files - Relevant ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Answers