Assess whether the system is high-risk under the EU AI Act (500f66)

SITUATION Privacy counsel supporting AI inventory in a university licensing an AI proctoring vendor has one working extract — hiring-tool adverse-impact tables — after an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty. If hiring-tool adverse-impact tables cannot support the system is high-risk, the only defensible AI Governance output is hold.

DECISION Privacy counsel supporting AI inventory in a university licensing an AI proctoring vendor must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using hiring-tool adverse-impact tables after an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. An internal audit finding that human review logs are empty is noise around an already-controlled Bias and Training Data process in a university licensing an AI proctoring vendor, given hiring-tool adverse-impact tables. 2. An internal audit finding that human review logs are empty is the event in hiring-tool adverse-impact tables that forces Policy or governance breach for privacy counsel supporting AI inventory under AI Governance. 3. Hiring-tool adverse-impact tables shows a one-file miss after an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty, not a Bias and Training Data program failure. 4. Hiring-tool adverse-impact tables cannot decide the system is high-risk yet after an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty; hold is the only AI Governance close a university licensing an AI proctoring vendor can defend.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Verify data provenance and the human-oversight gate privacy counsel supporting AI inventory can actually point to. 2. Walk the model input/output path recorded in hiring-tool adverse-impact tables and mark each hop approved, shadow, or unlogged. 3. Verify data provenance and the human-oversight gate privacy counsel supporting AI inventory can actually point to. 4. For this AI Governance Bias and Training Data file, read hiring-tool adverse-impact tables against an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty and write the one fact that would move the system is high-risk for privacy counsel supporting AI inventory.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance / Bias and Training Data packet (hiring-tool adverse-impact tables after an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty). The follow-on Bias and Training Data action is what privacy counsel supporting AI inventory does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.

COMMAND RETURNS - Bottom-line AI Governance option on the system is high-risk, then the evidence in hiring-tool adverse-impact tables, then the action for privacy counsel supporting AI inventory - Hypothesis scorecard against hiring-tool adverse-impact tables: supported / rejected / untestable - Owner and next date for privacy counsel supporting AI inventory in a university licensing an AI proctoring vendor - What changes the system is high-risk if an internal audit finding that human review logs are empty is later withdrawn