Cross-Framework Mapping

Japan AI GuidelinesvsISO 27005

See exactly how Japan AI Guidelines controls map to ISO 27005. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

12
Controls Mapped
1
Gaps Found
31%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Japan AI Guidelines maps to ISO 27005 with 31% coverage across 4 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 13 Japan AI Guidelines controls identifies 9 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in JP AI Third-Party + Supply Chain.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 13 controls analysed | 700 frameworks | 323K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 12 of 12 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 323K+ mappings across 700 frameworks.

JP AI Continuous Monitoring + Lifecycle(3 mappings)

JP-AIG-Continuous-Monitoring-Lifecycle-Model-Evaluation-Performance-Drift-Post-DeploymentJapan AI Guidelines Continuous Monitoring + AI System Lifecycle Management + Model Evaluation + Performance Drift + Concept Drift + Post-Deployment + Retraining Triggers + Safe Update + Decommissioning + Model Card Versioning3 targets
ISO27005-01Risk management policy and scope
ISO27005-05Risk management integration
ISO27005-18Risk register maintenance

JP AI Fairness + Bias(3 mappings)

JP-AIG-Fairness-Bias-Detection-Mitigation-Inclusive-AI-Discrimination-Prevention-10-Principles-2019-HeritageJapan AI Guidelines Fairness + Bias Detection + Mitigation + Inclusive AI + Discrimination Prevention + 10 Principles 2019 Heritage + Protected Attributes + Disparate Impact + Statistical Parity + Counterfactual Fairness3 targets
ISO27005-01Risk management policy and scope
ISO27005-05Risk management integration
ISO27005-18Risk register maintenance

JP AI Safety + AISI(3 mappings)

JP-AIG-Safety-Validation-Testing-Robustness-AISI-AI-Safety-Institute-Pre-Deployment-Evaluation-Red-TeamingJapan AI Guidelines Safety + Validation + Testing + Robustness + AISI AI Safety Institute (14 Feb 2024) + Pre-Deployment Evaluation + Red Teaming + Capability Evaluations + AI Incident Database + Safe Deployment + AI Safety Reports3 targets
ISO27005-01Risk management policy and scope
ISO27005-05Risk management integration
ISO27005-18Risk register maintenance

JP AI Scope + Society 5.0 + Strategy(3 mappings)

JP-AIG-Scope-METI-MIC-AI-Guidelines-Business-v1.0-April2024-Society-5.0-Cabinet-Office-AI-Strategy-CouncilJapan AI Guidelines Scope + METI/MIC AI Guidelines for Business v1.0 (April 2024) + Society 5.0 + Cabinet Office AI Strategy Council + 10 Principles 2019 Heritage + Education + Literacy + Fair Competition + Innovation Principles3 targets
ISO27005-06Risk identification methods
ISO27005-08Risk criteria and thresholds
ISO27005-10Risk interdependency analysis

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 700 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 700 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (323K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/month

Professional

  • Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • Unlimited full-text search
  • Framework self-assessment
  • PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between Japan AI Guidelines and ISO 27005?

Japan AI Guidelines has 13 controls across its framework, while ISO 27005 covers 40 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 4 overlapping controls (31% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in JP AI Third-Party + Supply Chain, where 1 Japan AI Guidelines controls have no direct ISO 27005 equivalent.

How many controls map between Japan AI Guidelines and ISO 27005?

Of 13 total Japan AI Guidelines controls, 4 map directly to ISO 27005 controls — representing 31% coverage. The remaining 9 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Japan AI Guidelines to ISO 27005?

9 Japan AI Guidelines controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27005. The highest concentration of gaps is in JP AI Third-Party + Supply Chain with 1 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.

Which control domains have the most gaps between Japan AI Guidelines and ISO 27005?

The domain with the highest gap count is JP AI Third-Party + Supply Chain (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.