Summer Special Sale Limited Time 60% Discount Offer - Ends in 0d 00h 00m 00s - Coupon code: 2493360325

Good News !!! ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Artificial Intelligence Management System Lead Auditor Exam is now Stable and With Pass Result

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Practice Exam Questions and Answers

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Artificial Intelligence Management System Lead Auditor Exam

Last Update 2 days ago
Total Questions : 198

AI management system (AIMS) is stable now with all latest exam questions are added 2 days ago. Incorporating ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor practice exam questions into your study plan is more than just a preparation strategy.

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor exam questions often include scenarios and problem-solving exercises that mirror real-world challenges. Working through ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor dumps allows you to practice pacing yourself, ensuring that you can complete all AI management system (AIMS) practice test within the allotted time frame.

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor PDF

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor PDF (Printable)
$50
$124.99

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor Testing Engine

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor PDF (Printable)
$58
$144.99

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor PDF + Testing Engine

ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor PDF (Printable)
$72.8
$181.99
Question # 1

Scenario 7 (continued):

Scenario 7: ICure, headquartered in Bratislava, is a medical institution known for its use of the latest technologies in medical practices. It has introduced groundbreaking Al-driven diagnostics and treatment planning tools that have fundamentally transformed patient care.

ICure has integrated a robust artificial intelligence management system AIMS to manage its Al systems effectively. This holistic management framework ensures that ICure's Al applications are not only developed but also deployed and maintained to adhere to the

highest industry standards, thereby enhancing efficiency and reliability.

ICure has initiated a comprehensive auditing process to validate its AIMS's effectiveness in alignment with ISO/IEC 42001. The stage 1 audit involved an on-site evaluation by the audit team. The team evaluated the site-specific conditions, interacted with ICure's personnel,

observed the deployed technologies, and reviewed the operations that support the AIMS. Following these observations, the findings were documented and communicated to ICure. setting the stage for subsequent actions.

Unforeseen delays and resource allocation issues introduced a significant gap between the completion of stage 1 and the onset of stage 2 audits. This interval, while unplanned, provided an opportunity for reflection and preparation for upcoming challenges.

After four months, the audit team initiated the stage 2 audit. They evaluated AIMS's compliance with ISO/IEC 42001 requirements, paying special attention to the complexity of processes and their documentation. It was during this phase that a critical observation was made:

ICure had not fully considered the complexity of its processes and their interactions when determining the extent of documented information. Essential processes related to Al model training, validation, and deployment were not documented accurately, hindering effective control and management of these critical activities. This issue was recorded as a minor nonconformity, signaling a need for enhanced control and management of these vital activities.

Simultaneously, the auditor evaluated the appropriateness and effectiveness of the "AIMS Insight Strategy," a procedure developed by

ICure to determine the AIMS internal and external challenges. This examination identified specific areas for improvement, particularly in

the way stakeholder input was integrated into the system. It highlighted how this could significantly enhance the contribution of relevant

parties in strengthening the system's resilience and effectiveness.

The audit team determined the audit findings by taking into consideration the requirements of ICure, the previous audit records and

conclusions, the accuracy, sufficiency, and appropriateness of evidence, the extent to which planned audit activities are realized and

planned results achieved, the sample size, and the categorization of the audit findings. The audit team decided to first record all the

requirements met; then they proceeded to record the nonconformities.

Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:

Question:

Based on Scenario 7, the audit team conducted a Stage 2 audit after a considerable time from Stage 1. Is this recommended?

Options:

A.  

No, the gap between Stage 1 and Stage 2 audits should be minimal (usually two weeks) to ensure that the AIMS remains consistent and relevant during the audit process

B.  

Yes, a bigger gap between Stage 1 and Stage 2 audits allows the audit team time for reflection and preparation in addressing the findings

C.  

No, the Stage 2 audit should be conducted immediately after the Stage 1 audit to quickly address any identified issues

Discussion 0
Question # 2

Question:

While auditing a company’s AIMS, the audit team reviewed policies, objectives, and communications to evaluate the involvement of top management. They also conducted interviews with staff to assess the engagement of leaders at various levels in ensuring the system’s effectiveness.

Based on this approach, what level of management should the auditors prioritize when assessing leadership and commitment?

Options:

A.  

They should focus on leadership at the top management level

B.  

They should focus on leadership at all levels of management

C.  

They should focus on the leadership of department heads

Discussion 0
Question # 3

Scenario 6 (continued):

Scenario 6: HappilyAI is a pioneering enterprise dedicated to developing and deploying artificial intelligence Al solutions tailored to enhance customer service experiences across various industries. The company offers innovative products like virtual assistants, predictive analytics tools, and personalized customer interaction platforms. As part of its commitment to operational excellence and innovation, HappilyAI has implemented a robust Al management system AIMS to oversee its Al operations effectively. Currently. HappilyAI is undergoing a comprehensive audit process of its AIMS to evaluate its compliance with ISO/IEC 42001.

Under the leadership of Jess, the audit team began the audit process with meticulous planning and coordination, setting the groundwork for the extensive on-site activities of the stage 1 audit. This initial phase was marked by a comprehensive documentation review. The audit scope encompassed a critical review of HappilyAI's core departments, including Research and Development (R&D), Customer Service, and Data Security, aiming to assess the conformity of HappilyAI's AIMS to the requirements of ISO/IEC 42001.

Afterward, Jess and the team conducted a formal opening meeting with HappilyAI to introduce the audit team and outline the audit activities. The meeting set a collaborative tone for the subsequent phases, where the team engaged in information collection, executed audit tests, identified findings, and prepared draft nonconformity reports while maintaining a strict quality review process.

In gathering evidence, the audit team employed a sampling method, which involved dividing the population into homogeneous groups to ensure a comprehensive and representative data collection by drawing samples from each segment. Furthermore, the team employed observation to deepen their understanding of the Al management processes. They verified the availability of essential documentation, including Al-related policies, and evaluated the communication channels established for reporting incidents.

Additionally, they scrutinized specific monitoring tools designed to track the performance of data acquisition processes, ensuring these tools effectively identify and respond to errors or anomalies. However, a notable challenge emerged as the team encountered a lack of access to documented information that describes how tasks about AIMS are executed. In addition to this, the team identified a potential nonconformity within the Sales Department. They decided not to record this as a nonconformity in the audit report but only communicated it to the HappilyAI's representatives.

During the stage 2 audit, the certification body, in collaboration with HappilyAI, assigned the roles of technical experts within the audit team. Recognized for their specialized knowledge and expertise in artificial intelligence and its applications, these technical experts are tasked with the thorough assessment of the AIMS framework to ensure its alignment with industry standards and best practices, focusing on areas such as data ethics, algorithmic transparency, and Al system security.

Question:

Which observation types did the audit team use to enhance their understanding of the AI management processes?

Options:

A.  

Qualitative and quantitative

B.  

Statistical and methodical

C.  

General and detailed

Discussion 0
Question # 4

A healthcare provider wants to develop a system that can analyze medical images, such as X-rays and MRIs, to assist doctors in diagnosing diseases. Which AI concept is most relevant for this application?

Options:

A.  

Natural Language Processing (NLP)

B.  

Computer Vision

C.  

Machine Learning (ML)

D.  

Deep Learning (DL)

Discussion 0
Question # 5

Question:

A software development company values collaborative decision-making. The CEO often gathers input from employees but retains final decision authority.

Which type of leadership does the CEO most closely embody?

Options:

A.  

Autocratic

B.  

Laissez-faire

C.  

Democratic

Discussion 0
Question # 6

How does the proposed EU AI Act plan to enforce AI regulations across Member States and support innovation?

Options:

A.  

By mandating that each Member State create new, AI-specific regulatory bodies, disregarding existing structures

B.  

By creating a centralized enforcement agency based in one Member State, responsible for overseeing AI regulation across the EU

C.  

By utilizing existing regulatory structures of individual Member States, complemented by the European AI Board for consistency and coordination

Discussion 0
Question # 7

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:

Based on functionality, what type of AI system did Future Horizon Academy establish?

Options:

A.  

Reactive machines

B.  

Theory of mind

C.  

Limited memory

D.  

General AI

Discussion 0
Question # 8

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 OptiFlow’s implemented requirements is NOT included in Clause 9 (Performance Evaluation) of ISO/IEC 42001? Refer to Scenario 2.

Options:

A.  

Implementation of an audit program

B.  

Review of the AIMS in planned intervals

C.  

Initiation of a continuous feedback mechanism from interested parties

Discussion 0
Question # 9

Which core element focuses on ensuring that the creators and operators of AI systems are responsible for the outcomes and impacts of those systems?

Options:

A.  

Safety and Reliability

B.  

Privacy and Security

C.  

Accountability

D.  

Fairness and Non-Discrimination

Discussion 0
Question # 10

Scenario 6 (continued):

Scenario 6: HappilyAI is a pioneering enterprise dedicated to developing and deploying artificial intelligence Al solutions tailored to enhance customer service experiences across various industries. The company offers innovative products like virtual assistants, predictive analytics tools, and personalized customer interaction platforms. As part of its commitment to operational excellence and innovation, HappilyAI has implemented a robust Al management system AIMS to oversee its Al operations effectively. Currently. HappilyAI is undergoing a comprehensive audit process of its AIMS to evaluate its compliance with ISO/IEC 42001.

Under the leadership of Jess, the audit team began the audit process with meticulous planning and coordination, setting the groundwork for the extensive on-site activities of the stage 1 audit. This initial phase was marked by a comprehensive documentation review. The audit scope encompassed a critical review of HappilyAI's core departments, including Research and Development (R&D), Customer Service, and Data Security, aiming to assess the conformity of HappilyAI's AIMS to the requirements of ISO/IEC 42001.

Afterward, Jess and the team conducted a formal opening meeting with HappilyAI to introduce the audit team and outline the audit activities. The meeting set a collaborative tone for the subsequent phases, where the team engaged in information collection, executed audit tests, identified findings, and prepared draft nonconformity reports while maintaining a strict quality review process.

In gathering evidence, the audit team employed a sampling method, which involved dividing the population into homogeneous groups to ensure a comprehensive and representative data collection by drawing samples from each segment. Furthermore, the team employed observation to deepen their understanding of the Al management processes. They verified the availability of essential documentation, including Al-related policies, and evaluated the communication channels established for reporting incidents.

Additionally, they scrutinized specific monitoring tools designed to track the performance of data acquisition processes, ensuring these tools effectively identify and respond to errors or anomalies. However, a notable challenge emerged as the team encountered a lack of access to documented information that describes how tasks about AIMS are executed. In addition to this, the team identified a potential nonconformity within the Sales Department. They decided not to record this as a nonconformity in the audit report but only communicated it to the HappilyAI's representatives.

During the stage 2 audit, the certification body, in collaboration with HappilyAI, assigned the roles of technical experts within the audit team. Recognized for their specialized knowledge and expertise in artificial intelligence and its applications, these technical experts are tasked with the thorough assessment of the AIMS framework to ensure its alignment with industry standards and best practices, focusing on areas such as data ethics, algorithmic transparency, and Al system security.

Question:

During the stage 2 audit, the certification body and the company assigned the roles of technical experts. Is this acceptable?

Options:

A.  

No, the roles of technical experts must be assigned by the certification body prior to conducting the audit

B.  

No, the company must assign the roles of technical experts independently of the certification body's involvement

C.  

Yes, the role of technical experts must be agreed upon by the certification body and the company during the audit process

Discussion 0
Get ISO-IEC-42001-Lead-Auditor dumps and pass your exam in 24 hours!

Free Exams Sample Questions