IMPORTANT NOTICE
Feedback
We have developed quality product and state-of-art service to ensure our customers interest. If you have any suggestions, please feel free to contact us at feedback@certsout.com
Support
If you have any questions about our product, please provide the following items: exam code screenshot of the question login id/email please contact us at and our technical experts will provide support within 24 hours. support@certsout.com
Copyright
The product of each order has its own encryption code, so you should use it independently. Any unauthorized changes will inflict legal punishment. We reserve the right of final explanation for this statement.
Question #:1 - [Conducting an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit]
Scenario 3 (continued):
ArBank is a financial institution located in Brussels, Belgium, which offers a diverse range of banking and investment servicesto its clients. To ensure the continual improvement of its operations, ArBank has implemented a quality management system QMS based on ISO 9001 and an artificial intelligence management system AIMS based on the requirements of ISO/IEC 42001.
Audrey, an experienced auditor, led an internal audit focused on the AIMS within ArBank. She assessed the chatbots integrated into thebank's website and mobile app, analyzing communications using big data technology to identify potential noncompliance, fraud, orunethical conduct. Instead of relying solely on the information provided by the chatbots, Audrey sought out evidence that would eitherconfirm or challenge the validity of the data, ensuring her conclusions were based on reliable and accurate information. Her review ofselected chatbot interactions confirmed they met their intended purpose.
For the specific context of ArBank's operations, Audrey utilized an Al system to assess the efficiency of the bank's digital infrastructure,focusing on tasks critical to the Finance Department. This Al system was able to analyze the functionality of chatbots integrated intoArBank's website and mobile app to determine if it adheres to ISO/IEC 42001 requirements and internal policies governing customerservice in the banking sector.
In addition, Audrey conducted a deeper assessment of the bank’s AIMS. Her evaluation included observing different stages of the AIMSlife cycle, from development to deployment, to ensure that roles and responsibilities were clearly defined and aligned with ArBank’soperational goals. She also evaluated the tools used to monitor and measure the performance of the AIMS.
Audrey continued the audit process by auditing ArBank's outsourced operations. Upon checking the contractual agreements between thetwo parties, Audrey decided that there was no need to gather audit evidence regarding the contractual agreement. She reviewed thecompany's processes for monitoring the quality of outsourced operations, determined whether appropriate governance processes are inplace with regard to the engagement of outsourced persons or organizations, and reviewed and evaluated the company's plans in case ofexpected or unexpected termination of theoutsourcing agreement.
Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:
Question:
What big data technology did Audrey utilize? Refer to Scenario 3.
Data management
Predictive analytics
Text analytics
Visual analytics
Answer: C
Explanation
Audrey used , which involves processing and analyzing textual interactions (like chatbot Text Analytics conversations) to derive meaningful information.
ISO/IEC 20546:2019 (Big Data Overview and Vocabulary) Clause 3.6defines text analytics as the application of AI techniques to understand and extract information from unstructured text.
In ISO/IEC 42001:2023, the standard stresses in Clause 8.2 (Data Management) the need for organizations to ensure that textual data is analyzed correctly to validate AI system effectiveness.
Reference:ISO/IEC 20546:2019 Clause 3.6; ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 8.2 (Data Management).
Question #:2 - [Managing an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit Program]
Question:
A certification body is conducting surveillance audits for a company managing multiple sites, including a temporary construction site with a limited duration.
The audit team is considering whether the presence of this temporary site should influence the frequency of surveillance audits.
Can this factor necessitate an adjustment in the audit schedule?
Yes, because it represents a management system certification of limited duration
No, temporary construction sites do not influence audit frequency
Yes, but only if the construction site operates under different seasonal conditions
Answer: A
Explanation
Temporary sites be considered in surveillance audit planning, as they are andpresent specific must time-limited operational risks.
ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.6.2.2states:“Audit frequency and scheduling must consider factors such as temporary sites, risk exposure, and operational changes.”
The further support the adjustment of surveillance activities based on the presence IAF MD1 Guidelines of temporary sites or operations.
Reference:ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.6.2.2; IAF MD1 Mandatory Document.
Question #:3 - [Preparing an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit]
Why is it important to have a clear and agreed audit scope?
A. B. C. D.
To reduce the time required for the audit
To prevent any legal liabilities
To maintain confidentiality of audit findings
To ensure all aspects of the management system are audited
Answer: D
Explanation
A ensures that the audit will clear and agreed audit scope adequately cover all relevant areas of the AI and that the audit team understands: Management System
Boundaries of the audit(departments, processes, AI systems)
Objectives and criteria
Whatmust be included or excluded
As per , determining the audit scope is critical to ensuring the ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 5.2 audit is effective, . Similarly, in , the scope must be defined to relevant, and complete
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 – Clause 9.2.1 evaluate the full effectiveness of the AIMS.
The PECB Lead Auditor Guide reinforces that without a clear scope, the audit risks missingcritical operational, ethical, or compliance-related areas
Reference: ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 5.2 (Establishing the audit program)
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 – Clause 9.2.1 (Internal audit planning)
PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 4: “Audit Scope and Objectives”
Question #:4 - [AI Management System Requirements]
The process to assess the potential consequences for individuals or groups of individuals, or both, and societies that can result from the AI system throughout its life cycle is known as:
AI System Risk Assessment
AI System Impact Assessment
Documentation of AI Systems
None of the above
Answer: B
Explanation
The correct term here is (AIIA), which is distinctly referenced in AI System Impact Assessment ISO/IEC as part of the organization’s process to identify and assess of AI 42001:2023 – Clause 6.1.2 potential impacts systems on stakeholders.
An AIIA is designed to evaluate the of AI use. It ethical, societal, legal, and human rights implications supportstransparency, stakeholder trust, and ethical alignment
While (Clause 6.1.1) focuses more on organizational and system-level risks (e.g., AI Risk Assessment technical, legal), the looks at — especially for Impact Assessment external consequences individuals and .groups
Reference: ISO/IEC 42001:2023 – Clause 6.1.2 (AI impact identification and assessment)
PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 2: “Planning and Risk Assessment,” Subsection: AI Impact Assessment
Question #:5 - [Fundamental Audit Concepts and Principles]
How are auditors expected to handle conflicts of interest during an audit?
By disclosing any potential conflicts and avoiding auditing the affected area
By excluding the affected area from the audit scope
By assigning an external auditor to handle the conflict
By ignoring conflicts to maintain impartiality
Answer: A
Explanation
The correct practice is: . disclose any potential conflicts and avoid auditing the affected area
ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 5.3 and Clause 6.3.2require auditors to and take steps declare conflicts of interest to . Failure to do so compromises the integrity and independence of the audit. preserve impartiality
According to the , auditors should PECB Lead Auditor Guide immediately report any situation where their , including past relationships, financial ties, or personal bias. objectivity may be questioned
Reference: ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 5.3 (Audit program management), Clause 6.3.2 (Establishing audit objectives, scope, and criteria)
PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 3: “Impartiality and Conflict of Interest Management”
Question #:6 - [Preparing an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit]
During the audit planning phase, what is the primary activity an auditor should focus on?
Conducting interviews with staff
B. C. D.
Preparing checklists and audit plans
Issuing corrective actions
Reviewing the final report
Answer: B
Explanation
During the , the auditor’s key responsibility is to audit planning phase prepare audit plans, checklists, and to ensure an effective and efficient audit. resource allocations
According to , planning includes preparing the audit plan, defining the audit ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 6.4.1 schedule, and ensuring that required documents, tools, and team members are ready.
The further emphasizes preparing tailored based on PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 4 audit checklists ISO/IEC 42001 clauses and relevant organizational processes.
Reference: ISO 19011:2018 – Clause 6.4.1 (Planning the audit)
PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 4: “Audit Planning Activities and Tools”
Question #:7 - [AI Management System Requirements]
A.
Scenario 2:
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:
Did Empsy HR Solutions meet all ISO/IEC 42001 requirements regarding the AI policy?
Yes, the AI policy meets all the requirements of ISO/IEC 42001
No, the AI policy was not communicated externally
No, the AI policy must refer to relevant organizational policies
No, the AI policy omitted continual improvement commitments
Answer: C
Explanation
ISO/IEC 42001 Clause 5.2 (AI Policy) requires the AI policy toalign with and reference other relevant . The failure to link the AI policy to relevant existing policies is a nonconformity as organizational policies per this requirement.
Reference:ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Clause 5.2 (AI Policy Requirements).
Question #:8 - [Preparing an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit]
Question:
Which of the following should be considered when determining the feasibility of the audit?
The auditee's ability to negotiate the terms and conditions
The auditee's cooperation
The motivation of the audit team members
Answer: B
Explanation
Feasibility of the audit depends greatly on in providing access to the auditee's willingness and cooperation documents, staff, systems, and sites.
ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.1.1mentions that the audit process feasibility depends on the auditee’s . willingness to support the audit activities
Similarly, outlines that: ISO 19011:2018 Clause 5.4 “Feasibility considerations include the auditee’s cooperation and the availability of access to information and personnel.”
Reference:ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.1.1; ISO 19011:2018 Clause 5.4.
Question #:9 - [Conducting an ISO/IEC 42001 Audit]
Scenario 7 (continued):
Scenario 7: ICure, headquartered in Bratislava, is a medical institution known for its use of the latest technologies in medical practices. Ithas 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 holisticmanagement 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 1audit 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 weredocumented 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 stage2 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, payingspecial 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 documentedinformation. Essential processes related to Al model training, validation, and deployment were not documented accurately, hinderingeffective control and management of these critical activities. This issue was recorded as a minor nonconformity, signaling a need forenhanced 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?
No, the gap between Stage 1 and Stage 2 audits should be minimal (usually two weeks) to ensurethat the AIMS remains consistent and relevant during the audit process
Yes, a bigger gap between Stage 1 and Stage 2 audits allows the audit team time for reflection and preparation in addressing the findings
No, the Stage 2 audit should be conducted immediately after the Stage 1 audit to quickly address any identified issues
Answer: A
Explanation
A between Stage 1 and Stage 2 is strongly recommended.
minimal gap
ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.3.1.2states:“The interval between Stage 1 and Stage 2 should be short to avoid changes to system implementation or operating conditions.”
The recommends , ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Auditor Training Guide a maximum gap of 90 days preferably 2–3 weeks, to ensure continuity.
Reference:ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Clause 9.3.1.2; ISO/IEC 42001 Lead Auditor Guide Section 6 ("Audit Timing and Continuity").
Question #:10 - [Fundamental Principles and Concepts of an AI Management System]
Which among the following is NOT a level of AI?
Artificial Narrow Intelligence
Artificial Machine Intelligence
Artificial General Intelligence
Artificial Super Intelligence
Answer: B
Explanation
The levels of AI commonly referenced in both guidance materials and AI governance ISO/IEC 42001 literature include:
Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI)– Specialized in a single task
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)– Human-level general problem-solving capability
Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI)– Hypothetical AI surpassing human intelligence
Artificial Machine Intelligenceis and does , not a formally recognized level not appear in ISO/IEC 42001 nor in PECB’s standard AI terminology.
The PECB Lead Auditor Guide defines the recognized levels under AI system classification and clarifies that terms like "Artificial Machine Intelligence" are and not part of professional non-standard or colloquial auditing or ISO frameworks.
Reference: PECB Lead Auditor Guide – Domain 1: Section “AI Fundamentals,” Topic: “Types and Levels of AI”
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 – While not listing these levels explicitly, relies on industry-aligned terminology consistent with ANI, AGI, and ASI
About certsout.com
certsout.com was founded in 2007. We provide latest & high quality IT / Business Certification Training Exam Questions, Study Guides, Practice Tests.
We help you pass any IT / Business Certification Exams with 100% Pass Guaranteed or Full Refund. Especially Cisco, CompTIA, Citrix, EMC, HP, Oracle, VMware, Juniper, Check Point, LPI, Nortel, EXIN and so on.
View list of all certification exams: All vendors
We prepare state-of-the art practice tests for certification exams. You can reach us at any of the email addresses listed below.
Sales: sales@certsout.com
Feedback: feedback@certsout.com
Support: support@certsout.com
Any problems about IT certification or our products, You can write us back and we will get back to you within 24 hours.