When planning the AIMS, consider the 4.1 issues and 4.2 requirements and decide which risks and opportunities need addressing so the AIMS achieves its intended results, undesired effects are prevented or reduced and continual improvement happens. Set and keep up AI risk criteria that distinguish acceptable from non-acceptable risk and support AI risk assessment, risk treatment and assessment of risk impacts. Determine risks and opportunities by the AI system's domain and application context, its intended use and the 4.1 context (for each system or grouping where several are in scope). Plan actions and how to integrate them into AIMS processes and evaluate their effectiveness, and keep documented information on the actions taken.
This control maps to 37 controls across 11 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 6.1.1 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of ISO/IEC 42001:2023 your existing evidence covers. Hold NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and 30 of 38 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 controls already carry evidence.
Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 0 were rejected on the NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) pair alone.
The graph holds this control, the 37 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.