Biography
PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor基礎訓練 & ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習範囲
当社は、他人からのコンテンツを切り取って貼り付けて受験者に販売するだけの無責任な会社ではなく、非常にうまく業務を遂行しています。当社のISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor練習資料により、多くのお客様がサービス全体の快適な体験を得ることができ、もちろんISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditorスタディガイドに合格しています。一部の試験受験者は、有用なISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditorの実際のテストを切望しているため、当社の製品は、効率的な練習資料が非常に不足しているお客様やその他のお客様を支援します。
PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor 認定試験の出題範囲：
| トピック |
出題範囲 |
| トピック 1 |
- ISO
- IEC 42001監査プログラムの管理：この試験セクションでは、AIコンプライアンス担当者のスキルを評価し、監査プログラム全体の監督について扱います。複数の監査の管理、監査パフォーマンスの追跡、そして監査結果をAIガバナンスに関連するより広範な組織目標と整合させることが含まれます。
|
| トピック 2 |
- AI管理システムの基本原則と概念：このセクションでは、AIコンプライアンス担当者のスキルを評価し、倫理的利用、信頼性、透明性といった人工知能の基本原則を網羅します。責任あるAIガバナンスのためにAI管理システムを導入する目的と重要性についても解説します。
|
| トピック 3 |
- ISO
- IEC 42001監査準備：この試験セクションでは、主任監査員のスキルを評価し、AIマネジメントシステム監査の計画と準備方法を網羅します。監査計画の作成、チームメンバーの選定、そして円滑な監査プロセスを実現するための明確な目標設定などが含まれます。
|
| トピック 4 |
- ISO
- IEC 42001監査の終了：このセクションでは、AIコンプライアンス担当者のスキルを評価し、監査プロセスを完了する方法を説明します。監査結果の報告、不適合の管理、継続的な改善とコンプライアンスを確保するためのフォローアップの実施などが含まれます。
|
>> PECB ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor基礎訓練 <<
ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習範囲 & ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor受験記
「学ぶのに遅すぎることはありません」、ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor認定の準備が一般的になりつつあります。特に今日の職場では、さまざまなトレーニング資料やツールが常に混乱を招き、品質をテストする時間を無駄にしています。実際、当社のISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditorテスト問題を完全に信じて、ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor試験に合格することを100％保証します。 ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditorのテスト問題を使用した後、残念ながら試験に不合格になった場合、証明証明書により当社から全額返金されます。
PECB ISO/IEC 42001:2023Artificial Intelligence Management System Lead Auditor Exam 認定 ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor 試験問題 (Q118-Q123):
質問 # 118
A global bank is currently evaluating the effectiveness of its AI management system controls through an AIMS audit. Which role is being played by this company?
- A. An accreditation body
- B. An auditee
- C. An advisory body
- D. A certification body
正解：B
解説：
In this context, the global bank is the auditee, as it is the organization being audited. According to ISO
19011:2018 - Clause 3.12, an auditee is "the organization being audited." Since the bank is undergoing an internal or external audit of its AI Management System (AIMS), it assumes the role of the entity whose AIMS is being evaluated for effectiveness, compliance, and performance.
* Accreditation body is responsible for accrediting certification bodies.
* Certification body conducts audits for conformity assessments.
* Advisory body provides consultation but does not participate directly in audits.
Reference: ISO 19011:2018 - Clause 3.12 (Auditee)
PECB Lead Auditor Guide - Domain 5: "Roles in the Audit Process"
質問 # 119
During a certification audit, the audit team reviewed the defined roles and responsibilities within the auditee and conducted interviews with key personnel. They also evaluated whether the roles and responsibilities were aligned with the AI policy and objectives, examined reporting mechanisms for concerns, and reviewed the reporting frequency and response time for AI-related matters. The implementation of which control of ISO
/IEC 42001 is being verified in this case?
- A. A.3 Internal organization
- B. A.6 External context and stakeholder engagement
- C. A.5 Assessing impacts of AI systems
- D. A.4 Resources for AI systems
正解：A
解説：
Control A.3 in ISO/IEC 42001:2023 focuses on the internal organization of the AI management system. This includes establishing, assigning, and communicating roles and responsibilities related to the AI system's governance and operations, aligning responsibilities with the AI policy and objectives, and establishing mechanisms for raising concerns and tracking responses.
In this case, reviewing roles, responsibilities, reporting mechanisms, and response times directly relates to verifying the implementation of A.3 Internal organization.
Reference:
ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Annex A, Control A.3 - Internal Organization
PECB ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Auditor Study Guide - Annex A Control Descriptions
===========
質問 # 120
Audit evidence must be:
- A. Structured
- B. Verifiable
- C. Physical
- D. Refutable
正解：B
解説：
Audit evidencemust beobjective and verifiable, meaning that it can beconfirmed through observation, documentation, or reproducible results. This is a foundational principle of auditing as per:
* ISO 19011:2018 - Clause 3.8defines audit evidence as "records, statements of fact or other information which arerelevant to the audit criteria and verifiable."
* This principle is also emphasized in ISO/IEC 42001 during internal audits (Clause 9.2), ensuring that conclusions are based onfactual, traceable, and confirmabledata.
Verifiability ensures the credibility and reliability of audit findings, especially critical in evaluating AIMS due to the complexity and potential subjectivity of AI behaviors.
質問 # 121
Scenario 2: OptiFlow is a logistics company located in New Delhi, India. The company has enhanced its operational efficiency and customer service by integrating AI across various domains, including route optimization, inventory management, and customer support. Recognizing the importance of AI in its operations, OptiFlow decided to implement an Artificial Intelligence Management System (AIMS) based on ISO/IEC 42001 to oversee and optimize the use of AI technologies.
To address Clauses 4.1 and 4.2 of the standard, OptiFlow identified and analyzed internal and external issues and needs and expectations of interested parties. During this phase, it identified specific risks and opportunities related to AI deployment, considering the system's domain, application context, intended use, and internal and external environments. Central to this initiative was the establishment and maintenance of AI risk criteria, a foundational step that facilitated comprehensive AI risk assessments, effective risk treatment strategies, and precise evaluations of risk impacts. This implementation aimed to meet AIMS's objectives, minimize adverse effects, and promote continuous improvement. OptiFlow also planned and integrated strategies to address risks and opportunities into AIMS's processes and assessed their effectiveness.
OptiFlow set measurable AI objectives aligned with its AI policy across all organizational levels, ensuring they met applicable requirements and matched the company's vision. The company placed strong emphasis on the monitoring and communication of these objectives, ensuring they were updated annually or as needed to reflect changes in technology, market demands, or internal processes. It also documented the objectives, making them accessible across the company.
To guarantee a structured and consistent AI risk assessment process, OptiFlow emphasized alignment with its AI policy and objectives. The process included ensuring consistency and comparability, identifying, analyzing, and evaluating AI risks.
OptiFlow prioritizes its AIMS by allocating the necessary resources for its comprehensive development and continuous enhancement. The company carefully defines the competencies needed for personnel affecting AI performance, ensuring a high level of expertise and innovation.
OptiFlow also manages effective internal and external communications about its AIMS, aligning with ISO
/IEC 42001 requirements by maintaining and controlling all required documented information. This documentation is meticulously identified, described, and updated to ensure its relevance and accessibility.
Through these strategic efforts, OptiFlow upholds a commitment to excellence and leadership in AI management practices.
To comply with Clause 9 of ISO/IEC 42001, the company determined what needs to be monitored and measured in the AIMS. It planned, established, implemented, and maintained an audit program, reviewed the AIMS at planned intervals, documented review results, and initiated a continuous feedback mechanism from all interested parties to identify areas of improvement and innovation within the AIMS.
Which of the following requirements of Clause 6.1.2 AI risk assessment did OptiFlow NOT consider?
- A. Documentation
- B. Cost minimization
- C. AI risk treatment
正解：B
解説：
Clause 6.1.2 of ISO/IEC 42001:2023 addresses AI risk assessment and includes requirements such as:
* Establishing and applying AI risk assessment criteria
* Identifying and analyzing risks and opportunities
* Evaluating AI risks
* Planning for AI risk treatment
* Documenting the process and outcomes to ensure traceability and repeatability In the scenario, OptiFlow:
* Established and maintained AI risk criteria.
* Performed identification, analysis, and evaluation of risks.
* Integrated AI risk treatment into its AIMS.
* Maintained documentation of objectives and internal communications as per the standard.
However, there is no reference in the scenario to cost minimization, either as a guiding factor or an outcome of the AI risk assessment process. While cost control may be a strategic or operational consideration for a business, it is not a core requirement under Clause 6.1.2 and is clearly not discussed in OptiFlow's implementation activities in the scenario.
Therefore, "Cost minimization" is the element NOT considered, making it the correct answer.
Reference:
* ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Clause 6.1.2 - AI risk assessment
* ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Annex A - Guidance on AI risk identification and evaluation
* PECB ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Auditor Guide, Section 6.1.2 - Interpretation of AI risk-based requirements
#############################################
質問 # 122
Which international standard does the top management of NeuraGen apply to govern the effective use of AI?
(Refer to Scenario 1)
Scenario: NeuraGen, founded by a team of AI experts and data scientists, has gained attention for its advanced use of artificial intelligence. It specializes in developing personalized learning platforms powered by AI algorithms. MindMeld, its innovative product, is an educational platform that uses machine learning and stands out by learning from both labeled and unlabeled data during its training process. This approach allows MindMeld to use a wide range of educational content and personalize learning experiences with exceptional accuracy. Furthermore, MindMeld employs an advanced AI system capable of handling a wide variety of tasks, consistently delivering a satisfactory level of performance. This approach improves the effectiveness of educational materials and adapts to different learners' needs.
NeuraGen skillfully handles data management and AI system development, particularly for MindMeld.
Initially, NeuraGen sources data from a diverse array of origins, examining patterns, relationships, trends, and anomalies. This data is then refined and formatted for compatibility with MindMeld, ensuring that any irrelevant or extraneous information is systematically eliminated. Following this, values are adjusted to a unified scale to facilitate mathematical comparability. A crucial step in this process is the rigorous removal of all personally identifiable information (PII) to protect individual privacy. Finally, the data is subjected to quality checks to assess its completeness, identify any potential bias, and evaluate other factors that could impact the platform's efficacy and reliability.
NeuraGen has implemented an advanced artificial intelligence management system (AIMS) based on ISO
/IEC 42001 to support its efforts in AI-driven education. This system provides a framework for managing the life cycle of AI projects, ensuring that development and deployment are guided by ethical standards and best practices.
NeuraGen's top management is key to running the AIMS effectively. Applying an international standard that specifically provides guidance for the highest level of company leadership on governing the effective use of AI, they embed ethical principles such as fairness, transparency, and accountability directly into their strategic operations and decision-making processes.
While the company excels in ensuring fairness, transparency, reliability, safety, and privacy in its AI applications, actively preventing bias, fostering a clear understanding of AI decisions, guaranteeing system dependability, and protecting user data, it struggles to clearly define who is responsible for the development, deployment, and outcomes of its AI systems. Consequently, it becomes difficult to determine responsibility when issues arise, which undermines trust and accountability, both critical for the integrity and success of AI initiatives.
- A. ISO/IEC 23503
- B. ISO/IEC 38507
- C. ISO/IEC 22989
正解：B
解説：
The scenario states: "Applying an international standard that specifically provides guidance for the highest level of company leadership on governing the effective use of AI..." This aligns directly with ISO/IEC 38507.
ISO/IEC 38507:2022 - Governance implications of the use of artificial intelligence by organizations - provides guidance to the governing body (i.e., top management) of organizations on how to ensure the proper oversight, accountability, and ethical use of AI. It complements ISO/IEC 42001 by focusing specifically on leadership roles and responsibilities in AI governance.
Option B (ISO/IEC 22989) refers to AI terminology and concepts.
Option C (ISO/IEC 23503) is not an officially published ISO standard relating to AI governance at this time.
Reference:
ISO/IEC 38507:2022 - Governance of AI, Clause 4
ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Clause 5.3 - Emphasis on leadership and ethical oversight PECB AI Lead Auditor Guide, Section 2.2 - Integration of ISO/IEC 38507 with ISO/IEC 42001
質問 # 123
......
世界で、多くの人はISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習教材を利用しています。ここから見ると、ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習教材はいい資料です。彼らはISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習教材を勉強したら、ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor試験に合格しました。だから、彼らはISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習教材に対して、感謝の気持ちです。つまり、あなたもISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習教材を購入すれば、後悔することはありません。
ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor学習範囲: https://www.passtest.jp/PECB/ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor-shiken.html
