# TERMINOLOGY.md # Standards Body Terminology **Project:** Standards Body **Primary domain:** standardsbody.ai **Core line:** Foundations for Frontier AI **Document type:** Canonical controlled vocabulary and terminology standard **Version:** 1.0 **Status:** Approved foundational source **Document owner:** Standards Body **Applies to:** All canonical files, website copy, research outputs, evaluation protocols, standards proposals, institutional documents, partnerships, public statements, diagrams, templates, registries, and contributor materials **Review cycle:** Annual review, with event-triggered revision after material changes in project identity, evaluation science, assurance practice, standards, law, interoperability, or institutional structure --- ## Document Purpose This document establishes the canonical terminology of Standards Body. It is the authoritative source for: - Preferred terms - Definitions - distinctions among related concepts - prohibited or misleading usage - capitalization and naming conventions - status labels - public-claims language - terminology used across the eight foundational papers - terminology for future standards, protocols, registries, reports, and institutional frameworks - rules for introducing, revising, deprecating, and retiring terms This document exists because unclear terminology creates real institutional failure. When terms such as *evaluation*, *audit*, *certification*, *accreditation*, *approval*, *safety*, *capability*, *risk*, *threshold*, and *standard* are used imprecisely, readers may misunderstand: - What evidence exists - What process was performed - Who performed it - What authority was involved - What claim is justified - Whether a result is current - Whether a requirement is voluntary or binding - Whether a system has been tested, reviewed, certified, or legally approved Standards Body uses controlled terminology to make these distinctions explicit. Where another Standards Body document conflicts with this file on terminology, this file governs unless a specialized approved standard expressly defines a narrower domain-specific term. --- # 1. Terminology Principles ## 1.1 Precision Before Familiarity Use the most accurate term, even when a more familiar term would sound simpler or more impressive. ## 1.2 Meaning Before Branding Terms should describe the actual function performed. They should not be selected to make a project, process, organization, or result appear more authoritative. ## 1.3 Scope Before Generalization Every important term should be interpreted within a stated scope. Examples: - Capability under which conditions? - Risk to whom? - Evaluation of which system version? - Certification against which scheme? - Recognition by which institution? - Compliance with which requirement? ## 1.4 Evidence Before Conclusion Words implying certainty should match the quality and limits of the evidence. ## 1.5 Authority Before Institutional Label Use *regulator*, *accreditation body*, *certification body*, *standards organization*, and related labels only when the organization actually performs that function under a legitimate mandate. ## 1.6 Version Before Reuse Terms used in protocols, standards, and schemas should be versioned when their meaning changes materially. ## 1.7 Plain Language With Technical Integrity Definitions should be understandable without removing distinctions necessary for institutional accuracy. ## 1.8 Stable Core, Extensible Detail The vocabulary should maintain a stable common core while allowing domain-specific extensions. ## 1.9 No Hidden Synonymy Two terms should not be treated as interchangeable merely because ordinary language uses them similarly. ## 1.10 No False Difference Different institutions may use different labels for substantially similar concepts. Mappings should identify when the difference is linguistic rather than substantive. --- # 2. Term Status Labels Every controlled term may receive one of the following statuses. ## 2.1 Preferred The default Standards Body term. ## 2.2 Accepted Permitted where context makes the meaning clear, but not preferred for canonical use. ## 2.3 Context-Specific Permitted only in a defined technical, legal, standards, or institutional context. ## 2.4 Discouraged Avoid because it is ambiguous, misleading, overly broad, or likely to imply unsupported authority. ## 2.5 Prohibited Do not use in Standards Body materials except when quoting or analyzing another source. ## 2.6 Deprecated Previously accepted but replaced by a clearer term. ## 2.7 Retired No longer used for current work but retained in historical records. --- # 3. Definition Format Canonical entries may include: - **Preferred term** - **Status** - **Definition** - **Use when** - **Do not confuse with** - **Usage note** - **Related terms** Not every entry requires every field. --- # 4. Core Project and Institutional Terms ## 4.1 Standards Body **Status:** Preferred proper name **Definition:** The independent research and institutional-design project developing foundations for frontier AI evaluation, assurance, standards, and governance. **Usage note:** Always capitalize both words when referring to the project. **Do not use as:** A generic substitute for every standards organization. **Authority note:** The name does not imply present regulatory, accreditation, certification, or governmental authority. ## 4.2 Foundations for Frontier AI **Status:** Preferred core line **Definition:** The canonical line describing the project's focus on the intellectual and institutional foundations required for credible frontier AI evaluation and standards. ## 4.3 Project **Status:** Preferred for present institutional stage **Definition:** The current Standards Body research and institutional-design effort. **Use when:** Describing current status. **Do not confuse with:** A formally recognized standards organization, regulator, or certification authority. ## 4.4 Institution **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** An enduring organization, system of rules, or arrangement that coordinates roles, authority, incentives, and behavior. **Usage note:** Standards Body may study future institutional forms without claiming that all such functions presently exist. ## 4.5 Institutional Design **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The deliberate design of roles, authority, governance, incentives, procedures, accountability, and relationships within or among institutions. ## 4.6 Institutional Infrastructure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The governance, standards processes, assurance systems, registries, contributor structures, transparency rules, and other durable arrangements that support repeatable institutional work. ## 4.7 Public-Interest Orientation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A commitment to improving evidence, accountability, beneficial development, public decision quality, and institutional legitimacy beyond the interests of any one company, government, or professional group. ## 4.8 Independent Project **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A project whose conclusions and public positions are not controlled by a developer, evaluator, funder, political party, government, or other outside institution. **Usage note:** Independence is multidimensional and should be supported by governance, funding disclosure, and publication rights. ## 4.9 Authority **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Legitimate power to make, enforce, recognize, or decide within a defined scope. **Usage note:** Authority may be legal, contractual, organizational, technical, or procedural. The source and scope should be stated. ## 4.10 Mandate **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented assignment of purpose, scope, authority, responsibility, and limits. ## 4.11 Jurisdiction **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The legal, geographic, organizational, or institutional domain within which an authority or requirement applies. ## 4.12 Public Claim **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A statement intended for or reasonably available to the public concerning a system, organization, evaluation, capability, safeguard, standard, or institutional status. ## 4.13 Canonical Source **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The authoritative Standards Body document governing a defined subject unless formally superseded. ## 4.14 Source of Truth **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** The designated authoritative record for a defined set of information. **Usage note:** Prefer *canonical source* in formal governance language. ## 4.15 Working Paper **Status:** Preferred status label **Definition:** A substantive research document intended for review and revision that does not itself establish a standard or binding requirement. ## 4.16 Canonical Working White Paper **Status:** Preferred status label **Definition:** A developed, versioned Standards Body paper that serves as the current authoritative project position on a foundational subject while remaining revisable. ## 4.17 Approved Foundational Source **Status:** Preferred status label **Definition:** A canonical document approved to govern a foundational project area such as identity, terminology, evidence, or governance. --- # 5. Artificial Intelligence System Terms ## 5.1 Artificial Intelligence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Machine-based systems capable of producing outputs such as predictions, recommendations, classifications, content, decisions, or actions in pursuit of explicit or implicit objectives. **Usage note:** Avoid treating artificial intelligence as one homogeneous technology. ## 5.2 AI Model **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A computational model whose learned parameters or structured logic produce outputs from inputs. **Do not confuse with:** An AI system, which may include prompts, tools, retrieval, interfaces, policies, monitoring, and human processes. ## 5.3 AI System **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The complete operational arrangement through which an AI model is configured, accessed, integrated, monitored, and used. An AI system may include: - One or more models - system prompts - tools - retrieval - memory - policies - interfaces - infrastructure - human operators - safeguards - monitoring - deployment rules ## 5.4 Frontier AI **Status:** Preferred but scope-sensitive **Definition:** AI models or systems at or near the leading edge of broadly relevant capability, scale, autonomy, or strategic significance. **Usage note:** The term does not imply that every frontier system is high risk. ## 5.5 Frontier Model **Status:** Preferred but scope-sensitive **Definition:** A model at or near the leading edge of relevant capability or scale at a stated time. **Usage note:** A model may cease to be frontier as the field changes. ## 5.6 Frontier AI System **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An AI system incorporating one or more frontier models or capabilities and whose behavior depends materially on system configuration and deployment context. ## 5.7 General-Purpose AI Model **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A model designed or capable of performing a wide range of distinct tasks across domains. **Usage note:** Legal definitions may vary by jurisdiction and should be quoted precisely when relevant. ## 5.8 Advanced AI System **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A comparatively capable or complex AI system. **Usage note:** Less precise than *frontier AI system*. Use only when the broader term is intended. ## 5.9 Foundation Model **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A model trained on broad data and adaptable to many downstream tasks. **Usage note:** Do not treat *foundation model* and *frontier model* as synonyms. ## 5.10 Open-Weight Model **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A model whose learned weights are made available under specified access and license conditions. **Do not confuse with:** Fully open-source software or a model with fully disclosed training data and methods. ## 5.11 Open-Source AI **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** AI software, models, data, or infrastructure made available under recognized open-source or open-use conditions. **Usage note:** State which components are open. ## 5.12 Closed Model **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A model whose weights or material internal components are not publicly available. ## 5.13 Model Family **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A set of related models sharing lineage, architecture, training approach, or product identity. ## 5.14 Model Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A distinct identified release, checkpoint, or deployed state of a model. ## 5.15 System Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A distinct identified state of the full AI system, including material configuration and deployment components. ## 5.16 Checkpoint **Status:** Preferred technical term **Definition:** A saved state of model parameters at a particular point in training or development. ## 5.17 Fine-Tuning **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Additional training that modifies a pretrained model for a task, behavior, domain, or preference. ## 5.18 Post-Training **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Training or adaptation performed after base pretraining, including instruction tuning, preference optimization, safety tuning, or domain adaptation. ## 5.19 System Prompt **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A high-priority instruction or context provided to a model as part of system configuration. ## 5.20 Scaffold **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Software, prompts, tools, memory, planning loops, agents, or other structure added around a model to support task performance. ## 5.21 Tool Use **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Model interaction with external software, APIs, environments, instruments, or information sources. ## 5.22 Retrieval-Augmented Generation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Generation supported by retrieving external information and providing it to the model. ## 5.23 Agent **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** An AI system or configuration that selects and executes actions over multiple steps in pursuit of an objective. **Usage note:** Do not assume autonomy, persistence, or independent agency beyond the specified design. ## 5.24 Agentic System **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An AI system that plans, acts, observes outcomes, and adapts over multiple steps with some degree of operational autonomy. ## 5.25 Autonomy **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which a system can select, sequence, and execute actions without direct human instruction at each step. ## 5.26 Deployment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Making a model or system available for operational use in a defined environment. ## 5.27 Release **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Making a model, system, weights, code, or access mechanism available to a defined audience. ## 5.28 Open Release **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Release under access conditions permitting broad public use or redistribution. ## 5.29 Access Tier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined level of model or system access with specified permissions, restrictions, identity requirements, or safeguards. ## 5.30 Deployment Context **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The users, environment, permissions, integrations, scale, purpose, and institutional conditions under which an AI system operates. --- # 6. Capability Terms ## 6.1 Capability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability of a model or system to perform a defined task or class of tasks under specified conditions. **Usage note:** Capability claims should state the system, conditions, resources, tools, time, and success criteria. ## 6.2 Demonstrated Capability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A capability supported by observed performance under stated evaluation conditions. ## 6.3 Latent Capability **Status:** Preferred but uncertain **Definition:** A capability that may exist in the model or system but has not been reliably elicited or demonstrated under available conditions. ## 6.4 Effective Capability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Capability available in practical use after accounting for access, scaffolding, reliability, cost, time, safeguards, and deployment constraints. ## 6.5 Potential Capability **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A capability that may emerge under plausible improvements in elicitation, scaffolding, fine-tuning, tools, or system configuration. ## 6.6 Capability Domain **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A field or class of activity in which capability is evaluated. Examples: - Cyber operations - biology - software engineering - persuasion - autonomous research - critical infrastructure ## 6.7 Capability Level **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined degree of capability within a domain or task framework. ## 6.8 Capability Profile **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A multidimensional description of a system's capabilities across tasks, conditions, reliability, cost, autonomy, and limits. ## 6.9 Capability Graph **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured representation of related capabilities, prerequisites, task families, and progression within a domain. ## 6.10 Capability Threshold **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined boundary in capability evidence used to trigger additional review, safeguards, governance, or other action. **Usage note:** A threshold should not be treated as a natural law. It is an institutional decision rule supported by evidence. ## 6.11 Critical Capability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A capability whose credible possession or availability may create severe, strategic, systemic, or difficult-to-reverse consequences. ## 6.12 High-Stakes Capability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A capability relevant to decisions with substantial potential harm, public consequence, strategic significance, or institutional importance. ## 6.13 Dangerous Capability **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A capability that materially enables harmful activity under a stated threat model. **Usage note:** Use with a defined domain and actor model. ## 6.14 Capability Uplift **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The increase in task performance, speed, reach, reliability, or sophistication attributable to use of an AI system. ## 6.15 Human Uplift **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Improvement in human performance resulting from AI assistance. ## 6.16 Superhuman Performance **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Performance exceeding a specified human reference group under comparable conditions. **Usage note:** The human reference group and conditions must be stated. ## 6.17 Generalization **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability to perform on relevant cases beyond the specific examples used in development or visible evaluation. ## 6.18 Transfer **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Application of learned capability from one task, domain, or context to another. ## 6.19 Reliability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The consistency with which a system achieves the intended outcome under stated conditions. ## 6.20 Robustness **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability to maintain acceptable performance or behavior under variation, disturbance, attack, distribution shift, or uncertainty. ## 6.21 Task Horizon **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The duration, number of steps, complexity, or dependency depth of a task. ## 6.22 Autonomy Level **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined degree of independent planning, action, persistence, or control within a system. --- # 7. Risk, Harm, and Safety Terms ## 7.1 Risk **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The combination of the likelihood and consequence of an adverse outcome under a defined context. **Usage note:** Capability is not identical to risk. ## 7.2 Hazard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A source or condition with the potential to cause harm. ## 7.3 Harm **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Adverse effect on people, institutions, rights, systems, property, security, the environment, or public welfare. ## 7.4 Impact **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The realized or reasonably expected consequence of an event, capability, deployment, or decision. ## 7.5 Consequence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The outcome or effect that follows from an event, action, system behavior, or decision. ## 7.6 Severity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The magnitude of harm or consequence. ## 7.7 Likelihood **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The estimated probability or plausibility of an event or outcome within a stated period and context. ## 7.8 Exposure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which people, systems, assets, or institutions are subject to a hazard. ## 7.9 Vulnerability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A weakness that can be exploited or activated to produce adverse effects. ## 7.10 Threat **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A potential cause of an unwanted incident, including an actor, event, condition, or capability. ## 7.11 Threat Actor **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A person, group, organization, or state capable of intentionally causing harm. ## 7.12 Threat Model **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured description of relevant actors, goals, capabilities, access, constraints, attack paths, and protected assets. ## 7.13 Misuse **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Use of an AI system for a harmful, prohibited, deceptive, or unintended purpose. ## 7.14 Accident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Harm arising without an actor's deliberate intention to cause that harm. ## 7.15 Systemic Risk **Status:** Preferred but scope-sensitive **Definition:** Risk capable of producing broad, interconnected, or cascading effects across systems, sectors, markets, institutions, or populations. ## 7.16 Catastrophic Risk **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Risk involving exceptionally severe harm at large scale. **Usage note:** Use only with explicit scope, pathway, and evidence. Avoid rhetorical use. ## 7.17 Existential Risk **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Risk threatening the long-term survival or potential of humanity. **Usage note:** Use only where directly relevant and carefully supported. It is not a synonym for high-stakes risk. ## 7.18 High-Stakes Risk **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Risk relevant to decisions where error could produce substantial, severe, strategic, or difficult-to-reverse consequences. ## 7.19 Residual Risk **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Risk remaining after controls or safeguards are applied. ## 7.20 Risk Tolerance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree of risk an institution is prepared to accept within a defined context. ## 7.21 Risk Appetite **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** The broad amount and type of risk an organization is willing to pursue or retain. ## 7.22 Risk Threshold **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined boundary at which a risk response, escalation, or decision is triggered. ## 7.23 Risk Indicator **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A measurable signal associated with a change in risk. ## 7.24 Safety **Status:** Preferred but highly bounded **Definition:** Freedom from unacceptable risk within a defined system, context, period, and set of assumptions. **Usage note:** Do not use *safe* as an absolute system label. ## 7.25 Safe AI **Status:** Discouraged **Reason:** Too broad and likely to imply universal assurance. **Preferred alternatives:** - Met the specified requirement - demonstrated the stated safeguard performance - remained within the defined risk tolerance under assessed conditions ## 7.26 AI Safety **Status:** Accepted but broad **Definition:** The field concerned with reducing unacceptable risks and harms associated with AI systems. **Usage note:** State the relevant safety domain where possible. ## 7.27 Security **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection against unauthorized access, compromise, misuse, interference, theft, disruption, or disclosure. ## 7.28 Reliability and Safety **Status:** Accepted phrase **Usage note:** Do not collapse reliability, security, robustness, and safety into one measure. --- # 8. Safeguard and Control Terms ## 8.1 Safeguard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A technical, procedural, organizational, contractual, or institutional measure intended to reduce risk. ## 8.2 Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A measure that modifies risk, supports conformity, or governs system behavior. ## 8.3 Mitigation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Action taken to reduce the likelihood or consequence of harm. ## 8.4 Preventive Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A control intended to prevent an adverse event. ## 8.5 Detective Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A control intended to identify an event, deviation, or failure. ## 8.6 Corrective Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A control intended to contain, remediate, or recover from failure. ## 8.7 Compensating Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An alternative control used when the primary control is unavailable or insufficient. ## 8.8 Defense in Depth **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Use of multiple, independent or partially independent controls so that failure of one does not determine the entire outcome. ## 8.9 Refusal **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A model or system response declining to perform a requested action. **Usage note:** Refusal rate is not a complete measure of safeguard quality. ## 8.10 Access Control **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A mechanism governing who or what can access a system, model, capability, tool, or information asset. ## 8.11 Rate Limit **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A restriction on the frequency or quantity of permitted requests or actions. ## 8.12 Monitoring **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ongoing observation and analysis of system behavior, use, conditions, or controls. ## 8.13 Human Oversight **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Human review, intervention, supervision, or decision authority over an AI system. ## 8.14 Human in the Loop **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A human participates directly in an operational decision or process step. **Usage note:** Do not use as a vague assurance claim. State what the human can see and do. ## 8.15 Human on the Loop **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A human supervises an automated process and may intervene. ## 8.16 Human in Command **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Human authority remains responsible for the system's objectives, deployment, and ultimate decisions. ## 8.17 Rollback **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reversion to a prior system state, configuration, or release. ## 8.18 Kill Switch **Status:** Discouraged **Reason:** Often implies a simple universal shutdown mechanism where none exists. **Preferred alternatives:** - Emergency shutdown control - access revocation - deployment suspension - system isolation ## 8.19 Containment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Limiting the spread, access, effect, or persistence of an adverse condition. ## 8.20 Safeguard Effectiveness **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which a safeguard reduces risk under a stated threat model and set of conditions. --- # 9. Evaluation and Testing Terms ## 9.1 Evaluation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured process for producing and interpreting evidence about a model, system, method, process, control, or claim. **Usage note:** Evaluation includes more than executing tasks. It includes design, administration, scoring, analysis, interpretation, and limitations. ## 9.2 Test **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined procedure used to observe or measure one or more characteristics. ## 9.3 Testing **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Execution of one or more tests according to a specified procedure. **Do not confuse with:** Evaluation, which includes interpretation and decision context. ## 9.4 Test Item **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A single question, task, scenario, case, prompt, or challenge administered within an evaluation. ## 9.5 Task **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined activity the model or system is asked to complete. ## 9.6 Task Family **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A group of tasks measuring related aspects of a capability or construct. ## 9.7 Scenario **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured situation describing context, actors, objectives, constraints, and events for evaluation or analysis. ## 9.8 Benchmark **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standardized set of tasks, procedures, and metrics used to compare performance. ## 9.9 Public Benchmark **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A benchmark whose tasks, data, or procedures are publicly available. ## 9.10 Held-Out Evaluation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An evaluation using protected tasks, data, environments, scoring elements, or combinations not available to the evaluated party before administration. ## 9.11 Private Benchmark **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A benchmark whose content is not publicly available. **Usage note:** Prefer *held-out evaluation* when protection and evidentiary purpose are central. ## 9.12 Secret Test **Status:** Discouraged **Reason:** Informal and may imply arbitrary secrecy. **Preferred alternative:** Held-out evaluation or protected evaluation material. ## 9.13 Dynamic Evaluation Protocol **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A versioned evaluation system designed to change as models, threats, tasks, evidence, and measurement limits change. ## 9.14 Static Evaluation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An evaluation whose tasks, methods, and scoring remain fixed during a defined period. ## 9.15 Evaluation Protocol **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The complete versioned specification governing evaluation purpose, scope, tasks, administration, configuration, scoring, analysis, security, reporting, and change control. ## 9.16 Test Procedure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The operational instructions for executing a particular test. ## 9.17 Evaluation Harness **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Software and infrastructure used to administer tasks, connect models, record outputs, score results, and preserve metadata. ## 9.18 Evaluation Environment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The technical or simulated setting in which a model or system performs evaluation tasks. ## 9.19 Reference Environment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A maintained environment used to support comparable evaluation across systems or institutions. ## 9.20 Evaluation Suite **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined collection of related tests or task families. ## 9.21 Evaluation Run **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** One execution of an evaluation or part of an evaluation under identified conditions. ## 9.22 Trial **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** One attempt at a test item or task. ## 9.23 Replication **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Independent or repeated execution intended to determine whether a result can be reproduced under stated conditions. ## 9.24 Reproduction **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** Recreating a result using the same or materially equivalent methods and artifacts. **Usage note:** Distinguish replication from exact rerun where necessary. ## 9.25 Reperformance **Status:** Preferred assurance term **Definition:** Independent execution of a procedure to verify reported work. ## 9.26 Validation **Status:** Preferred but context-sensitive **Definition:** Confirmation that a method, model, process, or requirement is suitable for its intended use. ## 9.27 Verification **Status:** Preferred but context-sensitive **Definition:** Confirmation through objective evidence that specified requirements have been fulfilled. ## 9.28 Benchmark Saturation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A condition in which benchmark performance becomes too high or compressed to distinguish meaningful capability differences. ## 9.29 Contamination **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Exposure of evaluation content, answers, or materially similar examples to model training, development, or preparation in a way that weakens the evidentiary value of the result. ## 9.30 Leakage **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Unauthorized or unintended disclosure of protected evaluation material or information. ## 9.31 Overfitting **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Excessive adaptation to a limited dataset, benchmark, or evaluation condition at the expense of generalization. ## 9.32 Benchmark Gaming **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Optimization for benchmark performance in a way that does not produce corresponding improvement in the underlying construct. ## 9.33 Evaluation Gaming **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Strategic behavior by an organization, evaluator, developer, or system that improves the reported result without achieving the intended evaluation objective. ## 9.34 Sandbagging **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Deliberate underperformance or concealment of capability. **Usage note:** Do not infer sandbagging from low performance alone. ## 9.35 Evaluation Awareness **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A system's ability to recognize or infer that it is being evaluated. ## 9.36 Evaluation Integrity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which evaluation design, administration, security, scoring, evidence, and reporting preserve the intended meaning of the result. --- # 10. Measurement and Statistical Terms ## 10.1 Construct **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The underlying concept or attribute an evaluation intends to measure. ## 10.2 Construct Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which an evaluation meaningfully measures the intended construct. ## 10.3 Content Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which evaluation content adequately represents the relevant domain. ## 10.4 Criterion Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which evaluation results correspond with an external outcome or reference. ## 10.5 Ecological Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which evaluation conditions reflect relevant real-world contexts. ## 10.6 Internal Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which observed results support the claimed causal or comparative interpretation within the study. ## 10.7 External Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which findings generalize beyond the assessed sample, setting, or conditions. ## 10.8 Reliability of Measurement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The consistency of a measurement process across repetitions, items, raters, or conditions. ## 10.9 Metric **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined quantitative or categorical measure. ## 10.10 Score **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A value assigned according to a defined scoring procedure. ## 10.11 Scoring Rule **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The method used to convert outputs or observations into scores. ## 10.12 Rubric **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Structured criteria used to judge or classify performance. ## 10.13 Threshold **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined boundary used for classification, escalation, or decision. **Usage note:** Always state what the threshold triggers. ## 10.14 Cut Score **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A score used to separate categories or decisions. ## 10.15 Baseline **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reference level of performance or condition used for comparison. ## 10.16 Human Baseline **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Performance by a defined human reference group under stated conditions. ## 10.17 Reference Group **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The population or category used as a comparison. ## 10.18 Confidence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree of justified belief in a conclusion based on available evidence. **Usage note:** Distinguish qualitative confidence from statistical confidence. ## 10.19 Confidence Interval **Status:** Preferred statistical term **Definition:** An interval estimated by a defined procedure that expresses statistical uncertainty around a parameter. ## 10.20 Uncertainty **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree and sources of incomplete knowledge concerning a measurement, result, interpretation, or future outcome. ## 10.21 Measurement Uncertainty **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Uncertainty associated with a measured or estimated value. ## 10.22 Epistemic Uncertainty **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Uncertainty arising from limited knowledge, evidence, models, or understanding. ## 10.23 Aleatoric Uncertainty **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Uncertainty arising from inherent variability or randomness. ## 10.24 Error **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Difference between an observed, estimated, recorded, or reported value and the relevant correct or reference value. ## 10.25 False Positive **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A positive finding when the relevant condition is absent. ## 10.26 False Negative **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A negative finding when the relevant condition is present. ## 10.27 Sensitivity **Status:** Preferred statistical term **Definition:** The ability of a method to identify relevant positive cases or detect meaningful change. ## 10.28 Specificity **Status:** Preferred statistical term **Definition:** The ability of a method to exclude relevant negative cases. ## 10.29 Calibration **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which stated probabilities or confidence levels correspond to observed frequencies or outcomes. ## 10.30 Discrimination **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability of a metric or task to distinguish among relevant levels of performance. ## 10.31 Statistical Power **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The probability that a study or test will detect an effect of a specified size when it exists. ## 10.32 Sample **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A subset selected from a broader population or task universe. ## 10.33 Task Population **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The broader set of relevant tasks that an evaluation sample is intended to represent. ## 10.34 Distribution Shift **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A change between the data, tasks, users, or environment used in development or evaluation and those encountered later. ## 10.35 Aggregate Score **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A combined score derived from multiple items, tasks, domains, or metrics. ## 10.36 Composite Score **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A score combining different measures according to a defined method. **Usage note:** Composite scores can conceal important tradeoffs and should be decomposable. ## 10.37 Ordinal Scale **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A scale indicating order without guaranteeing equal distance between levels. ## 10.38 Ceiling Effect **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reduced ability to distinguish performance because results cluster near the maximum. ## 10.39 Floor Effect **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reduced ability to distinguish performance because results cluster near the minimum. --- # 11. Elicitation Terms ## 11.1 Elicitation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The process of configuring prompts, tools, examples, scaffolds, resources, or procedures to reveal a model or system's available capability. ## 11.2 Elicitation Budget **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The time, compute, attempts, human effort, tools, and resources permitted for capability elicitation. ## 11.3 Prompting **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Providing instructions, examples, context, or questions to a model. ## 11.4 Few-Shot Prompting **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Prompting that includes a small number of examples. ## 11.5 Chain-of-Thought **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Intermediate reasoning text generated or requested during problem solving. **Usage note:** Do not assume that visible chain-of-thought faithfully represents internal model reasoning. ## 11.6 Tool-Augmented Elicitation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Elicitation using tools or external systems. ## 11.7 Fine-Tuning-Based Elicitation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Elicitation that uses additional training to reveal or improve performance. ## 11.8 Best-Effort Elicitation **Status:** Preferred but should be specified **Definition:** A documented attempt to obtain strong performance using reasonable available methods and resources. **Usage note:** The phrase is incomplete without an elicitation budget and method description. ## 11.9 Capability Ceiling Estimate **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An estimate of the highest performance plausibly available under defined elicitation conditions. ## 11.10 Elicitation Failure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Failure to reveal capability because the elicitation method, integration, tools, instructions, or resources were insufficient. --- # 12. Evidence and Epistemic Terms ## 12.1 Evidence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information, observation, artifact, record, result, or testimony relevant to supporting or challenging a claim. ## 12.2 Direct Evidence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evidence derived directly from the object, event, system, or process at issue. ## 12.3 Indirect Evidence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evidence supporting a claim through inference rather than direct observation. ## 12.4 Primary Source **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An original source of data, law, standards text, evaluation results, institutional policy, or first-hand record. ## 12.5 Secondary Source **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A source interpreting, summarizing, or analyzing primary material. ## 12.6 Expert Judgment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reasoned assessment by a qualified person based on relevant knowledge and evidence. ## 12.7 Expert Opinion **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A conclusion or interpretation offered by an expert. **Usage note:** Prefer *expert judgment* where a structured evidentiary process exists. ## 12.8 Claim **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A proposition asserted to be true, supported, or justified. ## 12.9 Finding **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A supported conclusion arising from evaluation, review, inspection, audit, or analysis. ## 12.10 Conclusion **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reasoned determination based on evidence and analysis. ## 12.11 Inference **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conclusion derived from evidence rather than directly observed. ## 12.12 Assumption **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A proposition accepted for purposes of analysis without full proof. ## 12.13 Hypothesis **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A testable proposed explanation or prediction. ## 12.14 Open Question **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A materially unresolved question requiring further evidence or analysis. ## 12.15 Knowledge Gap **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A missing body of evidence, method, understanding, or institutional capability. ## 12.16 Evidence Gap **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Missing evidence necessary to support or resolve a defined claim. ## 12.17 Evidence Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The level, type, quality, and sufficiency of evidence required for a defined claim or decision. ## 12.18 Burden of Proof **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Responsibility to provide sufficient evidence for a claim or decision. ## 12.19 Weight of Evidence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The combined strength, relevance, quality, consistency, and independence of available evidence. ## 12.20 Corroboration **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Independent or distinct evidence supporting the same conclusion. ## 12.21 Triangulation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Use of multiple methods, sources, or perspectives to evaluate a claim. ## 12.22 Provenance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The origin, history, custody, modification, and ownership of evidence or an artifact. ## 12.23 Chain of Custody **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented record of possession, transfer, access, and handling of evidence or protected material. ## 12.24 Traceability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability to connect a claim, result, decision, or artifact to its sources, methods, versions, and responsible parties. ## 12.25 Reproducibility **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which a result can be obtained again using the same or adequately specified data, code, methods, and conditions. ## 12.26 Replicability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which a finding can be supported through an independent study or materially independent implementation. ## 12.27 Falsifiability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which a claim can be meaningfully tested and potentially shown false. ## 12.28 Negative Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result that does not support the tested hypothesis, expected effect, or claimed capability. **Usage note:** A negative result is not automatically evidence of absence. ## 12.29 Absence of Evidence **Status:** Preferred phrase **Definition:** Lack of observed evidence supporting a claim. ## 12.30 Evidence of Absence **Status:** Preferred phrase **Definition:** Evidence that meaningfully supports the conclusion that a condition is absent under stated bounds. ## 12.31 Epistemic Status **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A concise description of how strongly a claim is supported and what uncertainty remains. ## 12.32 Confidence Rating **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined qualitative or quantitative expression of confidence in a conclusion. --- # 13. Review Terms ## 13.1 Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Structured examination of evidence, methods, reasoning, processes, or claims. ## 13.2 Peer Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review by people with relevant expertise who are peers in the relevant field or practice. ## 13.3 Internal Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review performed within the organization responsible for the work or claim. ## 13.4 External Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review performed by a person or organization outside the reviewed organization. **Usage note:** External does not automatically mean independent. ## 13.5 Independent Expert Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review by qualified people or institutions sufficiently free from controlling conflicts to form and communicate a genuine judgment. ## 13.6 Technical Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review focused on technical methods, evidence, systems, or results. ## 13.7 Methodological Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review focused on design, validity, measurement, assumptions, and analysis. ## 13.8 Security Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review focused on threats, vulnerabilities, controls, access, and information protection. ## 13.9 Governance Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review focused on authority, roles, conflicts, decisions, accountability, and institutional process. ## 13.10 Public-Interest Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review focused on public consequences, affected parties, rights, access, distribution, and institutional legitimacy. ## 13.11 Review Panel **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A group appointed to conduct or advise a review. ## 13.12 Review Chair **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The person responsible for coordinating a review process and preserving procedural integrity. ## 13.13 Review Mandate **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The documented question, scope, authority, access, methods, outputs, constraints, and decision relationship of a review. ## 13.14 Review Finding **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A supported conclusion produced through review. ## 13.15 Dissent **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reasoned disagreement with the primary or majority conclusion. ## 13.16 Minority Report **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented dissenting assessment issued alongside the principal review conclusion. ## 13.17 Right of Reply **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Opportunity for the reviewed party to respond to factual or procedural findings without obtaining veto power over the conclusion. ## 13.18 Factual Correction Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review of a draft for factual error, misunderstood configuration, confidentiality, or security. **Usage note:** It should not become conclusion negotiation. ## 13.19 Meta-Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Review of the quality, consistency, or validity of another review. ## 13.20 Review Independence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which reviewers can select methods, access evidence, interpret results, communicate findings, and resist improper influence. --- # 14. Audit, Inspection, and Assurance Terms ## 14.1 Audit **Status:** Preferred but criteria-dependent **Definition:** A systematic, independent, and documented process for obtaining and evaluating evidence against defined criteria. **Usage note:** Do not call every review an audit. ## 14.2 AI Audit **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** An audit concerning an AI model, system, organization, process, control, or requirement. **Usage note:** The criteria and scope must be stated. ## 14.3 Inspection **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Examination of a product, process, service, system, installation, or design and determination of conformity with specified or professional requirements. ## 14.4 Assessment **Status:** Accepted broad term **Definition:** A structured process of determining characteristics, condition, performance, conformity, or risk. **Usage note:** Prefer a more specific term where possible. ## 14.5 Assurance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Confidence supported by evidence, review, and institutional process that a claim or requirement is sufficiently reliable for a defined purpose. ## 14.6 Assurance Engagement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured engagement in which an independent practitioner evaluates evidence and provides a conclusion or defined findings. ## 14.7 Limited Assurance **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Assurance providing moderate confidence based on narrower evidence or procedures than reasonable assurance. ## 14.8 Reasonable Assurance **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A high but not absolute level of assurance supported by sufficiently extensive evidence and procedures. ## 14.9 Absolute Assurance **Status:** Prohibited as a practical claim **Reason:** No evaluation or audit can eliminate all uncertainty. ## 14.10 Continuous Assurance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ongoing or repeated evidence collection, evaluation, monitoring, and review rather than a one-time assessment. ## 14.11 Attestation **Status:** Preferred conformity term **Definition:** Issue of a statement, based on a decision following review, that fulfillment of specified requirements has been demonstrated. ## 14.12 Conformity Assessment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Demonstration that specified requirements relating to a product, process, system, person, or body are fulfilled. ## 14.13 First-Party Assessment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Assessment performed by the organization responsible for the object or claim. ## 14.14 Second-Party Assessment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Assessment performed by a party with a user, purchaser, contractual, or direct stakeholder interest. ## 14.15 Third-Party Assessment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Assessment performed by a body sufficiently independent of provider and immediate user interests to support an impartial judgment. ## 14.16 Third-Party Evaluator **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An organization or person performing an evaluation in a third-party role. ## 14.17 Auditor **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A person qualified and authorized to perform an audit against defined criteria. **Usage note:** Do not use as a prestige label for general evaluators. ## 14.18 Evaluator **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A person or organization that designs, conducts, administers, interprets, or reviews an evaluation. ## 14.19 Evaluation Laboratory **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An organization or unit performing technical evaluation under controlled methods and quality systems. ## 14.20 Conformity-Assessment Body **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A body performing conformity-assessment activities such as testing, inspection, certification, validation, or verification. ## 14.21 CAB **Status:** Accepted abbreviation after first use **Definition:** Conformity-assessment body. ## 14.22 Assurance Level **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined degree of review depth, evidence, access, independence, continuity, and confidence. ## 14.23 Scope of Assurance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The exact claims, systems, versions, requirements, and period covered by an assurance conclusion. --- # 15. Certification and Accreditation Terms ## 15.1 Certification **Status:** Preferred but strictly controlled **Definition:** Third-party attestation that specified requirements have been fulfilled within a defined certification scheme. **Usage note:** Certification does not mean universal safety or government approval. ## 15.2 Certification Body **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A third-party body that conducts certification under a defined scheme. ## 15.3 Certificate **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A formal record of certification identifying the subject, scheme, scope, issuer, version, date, and validity. ## 15.4 Certification Scheme **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The rules, procedures, governance, criteria, assessment methods, surveillance, claims, and responsibilities governing certification. ## 15.5 Certification Mark **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A controlled mark indicating certification under a defined scheme. ## 15.6 Certified Safe **Status:** Prohibited unless quoting another source **Reason:** Certification is always against specified requirements and cannot establish universal safety. ## 15.7 Accreditation **Status:** Preferred but strictly controlled **Definition:** Independent recognition that a conformity-assessment body is competent and impartial to perform specified activities within a defined scope. ## 15.8 Accreditation Body **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A body that performs accreditation. ## 15.9 Scope of Accreditation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The specific activities, methods, domains, systems, locations, and limits for which a body is recognized as competent. ## 15.10 Accredited Evaluator **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** An evaluator accredited for a defined scope by a legitimate accreditation body. **Usage note:** Never omit the scope. ## 15.11 Self-Accreditation **Status:** Prohibited as a legitimacy claim **Reason:** Accreditation requires independent recognition. ## 15.12 Accreditation-Like Review **Status:** Discouraged **Preferred alternative:** Evaluator qualification review or pilot recognition process. ## 15.13 Recognition **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Acceptance of evidence, competence, process, status, or decision for a defined purpose. ## 15.14 Mutual Recognition **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An arrangement through which participating institutions accept specified results, qualifications, certificates, or decisions issued under another recognized system. ## 15.15 Unilateral Recognition **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Acceptance by one institution of another institution's evidence or status without reciprocal obligation. ## 15.16 Recognition Scope **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The defined activities, evidence, domains, methods, or decisions covered by recognition. ## 15.17 Approval **Status:** Discouraged unless authority is clear **Definition:** Formal acceptance by an authorized body. **Usage note:** State who approved what and under which authority. ## 15.18 Official Approval **Status:** Prohibited for Standards Body's present work ## 15.19 Endorsement **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Public expression of support. **Usage note:** Partnership, citation, or participation does not automatically imply endorsement. --- # 16. Standards and Requirements Terms ## 16.1 Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A document established through a recognized process that provides rules, requirements, guidelines, characteristics, or common practices for repeated use. **Usage note:** A standard may be voluntary. ## 16.2 Proposed Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A draft or candidate standard not yet approved through its governing process. ## 16.3 Technical Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard specifying technical requirements, methods, measurements, interfaces, or performance characteristics. ## 16.4 Management-System Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard defining organizational requirements for establishing, operating, maintaining, and improving a management system. ## 16.5 Performance Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard defining required outcomes or performance without necessarily prescribing the exact method. ## 16.6 Process Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard defining required procedures, controls, records, or workflows. ## 16.7 Interface Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard defining how systems, data, protocols, or institutions interact. ## 16.8 Voluntary Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard whose adoption is not legally required by default. ## 16.9 International Standard **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A standard developed and approved through a recognized international standards process. **Usage note:** Do not use merely because a document has global aspirations. ## 16.10 Consensus Standard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A standard developed through a process intended to balance relevant interests and resolve comments toward broad agreement. **Usage note:** Consensus does not require unanimity. ## 16.11 Specification **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A detailed description of technical, procedural, or functional requirements. ## 16.12 Technical Specification **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A specification focused on technical requirements or methods. ## 16.13 Recommended Practice **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Nonbinding guidance describing a preferred method based on available evidence and professional judgment. ## 16.14 Guidance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Advisory material explaining principles, interpretation, or implementation. ## 16.15 Framework **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured set of concepts, functions, outcomes, or practices that supports consistent thinking and action while allowing adaptation. ## 16.16 Code of Conduct **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A set of expected behaviors or commitments adopted voluntarily or recognized by an institution. ## 16.17 Code of Practice **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Operational guidance describing accepted ways to implement or satisfy expectations. ## 16.18 Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A condition that must be fulfilled within a defined context. ## 16.19 Voluntary Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement accepted through choice, contract, framework, membership, or certification scheme. ## 16.20 Mandatory Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement imposed through law, regulation, contract, or authorized institutional rule. ## 16.21 Binding Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement carrying enforceable legal, contractual, or organizational effect. ## 16.22 Best Practice **Status:** Discouraged unless evidence is strong **Reason:** Often used without proof that the practice is best. **Preferred alternatives:** - Recommended practice - established practice - current leading practice ## 16.23 Good Practice **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A practice supported by relevant experience or evidence as useful or responsible. ## 16.24 Minimum Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The least condition that must be met within a scheme or rule. ## 16.25 Baseline Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A common foundational requirement applying across a defined class. ## 16.26 Progressive Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement whose rigor, coverage, assurance, or consequence increases through defined stages or triggers. ## 16.27 Tiered Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement organized into levels of increasing rigor or applicability. ## 16.28 Performance-Based Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement specifying an outcome rather than one required method. ## 16.29 Prescriptive Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement specifying a particular method, control, procedure, or design. ## 16.30 Risk-Based Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement whose applicability or rigor varies according to risk. ## 16.31 Capability-Based Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement triggered by demonstrated or reasonably anticipated capability. ## 16.32 Deployment-Based Requirement **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement triggered by deployment context, access, scale, autonomy, or use. ## 16.33 Incorporation by Reference **Status:** Preferred legal term **Definition:** Use of an external standard or document as part of a binding requirement. ## 16.34 Presumption of Conformity **Status:** Preferred legal or scheme term **Definition:** A presumption that compliance with a recognized standard provides evidence of compliance with a specified requirement. ## 16.35 Safe Harbor **Status:** Preferred legal term **Definition:** A provision offering defined protection or reduced exposure when specified practices are followed. ## 16.36 Regulatory Sandbox **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A controlled environment for testing innovations under oversight and defined conditions. ## 16.37 Phase-In **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Staged introduction of a requirement across time, systems, actors, or risk tiers. ## 16.38 Sunset Clause **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A provision causing a requirement or program to expire unless renewed. ## 16.39 Review Clause **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A requirement that a rule, standard, or program be reassessed after a period or trigger event. --- # 17. Compliance Terms ## 17.1 Compliance **Status:** Preferred but source-dependent **Definition:** Fulfillment of applicable legal, regulatory, contractual, or organizational obligations. **Usage note:** State the governing requirement. ## 17.2 Conformity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Fulfillment of specified requirements. **Distinction:** Conformity is broader and may apply to voluntary standards. Compliance often implies binding obligations. ## 17.3 Nonconformity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Failure to fulfill a specified requirement. ## 17.4 Noncompliance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Failure to fulfill an applicable binding obligation. ## 17.5 Compliant AI **Status:** Discouraged **Reason:** Too broad. Compliance always depends on a defined requirement and jurisdiction. ## 17.6 Compliance Certification **Status:** Context-specific **Usage note:** Use only when a valid certification scheme assesses defined compliance requirements. ## 17.7 Compliance Review **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Structured review of adherence to a defined legal, contractual, policy, or framework requirement. ## 17.8 Compliance Theater **Status:** Preferred critical term **Definition:** Formal or documentary conformity without meaningful achievement of the underlying objective. ## 17.9 Checklist Compliance **Status:** Preferred critical term **Definition:** Narrow completion of listed items without sufficient attention to actual effectiveness or context. ## 17.10 Legal Compliance Opinion **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A legal determination or opinion provided by a qualified legal authority or professional. **Usage note:** Standards Body does not issue legal compliance opinions unless a formally qualified and authorized legal process exists. --- # 18. Governance Terms ## 18.1 Governance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The system of authority, roles, decisions, accountability, oversight, and control through which an organization or activity is directed. ## 18.2 Governance Framework **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented structure defining governance principles, roles, procedures, decisions, and accountability. ## 18.3 Governing Body **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The body with formal authority to direct or oversee an organization or scheme. ## 18.4 Board **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A formally constituted governing or oversight body. ## 18.5 Secretariat **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The administrative and coordination function supporting governance, committees, records, and process. ## 18.6 Committee **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A formally appointed group responsible for a defined area of work or decision. ## 18.7 Working Group **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A group formed to develop, analyze, or recommend work on a defined subject. ## 18.8 Technical Committee **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A committee responsible for technical standards, methods, or decisions. ## 18.9 Advisory Group **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A group providing advice without final decision authority unless expressly granted. ## 18.10 Decision Right **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Authority to make a defined decision. ## 18.11 Accountability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Obligation to explain, justify, and accept responsibility for decisions and outcomes. ## 18.12 Responsibility **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Assigned duty to perform or ensure an activity. ## 18.13 Oversight **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Independent or supervisory observation and review of an activity, institution, or decision. ## 18.14 Delegation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Assignment of authority or responsibility from one body to another. ## 18.15 Escalation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Transfer of an issue or decision to a higher or different authority because of consequence, conflict, uncertainty, or defined trigger. ## 18.16 Appeal **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A formal request for review of a decision. ## 18.17 Complaint **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An expression of dissatisfaction or allegation concerning process, conduct, evidence, or outcome that requires documented handling. ## 18.18 Recusal **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Withdrawal from participation in a decision or review because of a conflict or other disqualifying condition. ## 18.19 Quorum **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The minimum participation required for a body to conduct official business. ## 18.20 Consensus **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Broad agreement characterized by resolution of substantial objections, without requiring unanimity. ## 18.21 Unanimity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Agreement of every eligible decision participant. ## 18.22 Majority Decision **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A decision supported by more than half of eligible votes under defined rules. ## 18.23 Minority Position **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented position not adopted by the majority. ## 18.24 Emergency Decision **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A time-sensitive decision made under a defined emergency process with limited scope and subsequent review. ## 18.25 Institutional Legitimacy **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Justified acceptance of an institution's role and decisions based on competence, process, participation, accountability, authority, and public purpose. ## 18.26 Institutional Capture **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Distortion of an institution's decisions or agenda by a stakeholder, funder, industry, government, ideology, or professional group. --- # 19. Independence, Impartiality, and Conflict Terms ## 19.1 Independence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Sufficient freedom from controlling relationships or interests to form and communicate a genuine judgment. ## 19.2 Impartiality **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Presence of objectivity and management of conflicts so that judgment is not improperly influenced. ## 19.3 Objectivity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reliance on evidence and defined criteria rather than improper preference or interest. ## 19.4 Neutrality **Status:** Discouraged when used as a universal institutional claim **Reason:** Institutions and decisions always operate within values, mandates, and assumptions. **Preferred alternatives:** - Independent - impartial - evidence-based - nonpartisan ## 19.5 Conflict of Interest **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A relationship, incentive, obligation, or commitment that could impair, or reasonably appear to impair, impartial judgment. ## 19.6 Material Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conflict significant enough to require disclosure, mitigation, role limitation, recusal, or exclusion. ## 19.7 Financial Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conflict arising from payment, investment, equity, grants, employment, or economic dependence. ## 19.8 Organizational Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conflict arising from governance, ownership, institutional role, or reporting relationships. ## 19.9 Intellectual Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conflict arising from strong prior commitments, proprietary methods, public positions, or reputational stakes. ## 19.10 Political Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A conflict arising from party, government, national, or political interests. ## 19.11 Reviewer Capture **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Material influence over a reviewer by the reviewed organization, funder, professional community, government, or ideology. ## 19.12 Client Capture **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Dependence on a client relationship that weakens willingness or ability to issue unfavorable findings. ## 19.13 Regulatory Capture **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Distortion of regulatory action toward the interests of regulated entities or other powerful stakeholders. ## 19.14 Disclosure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Communication of relevant information to defined recipients. ## 19.15 Conflict Disclosure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Documentation of relationships or interests relevant to impartiality. ## 19.16 Mitigation of Conflict **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Action to reduce the effect or appearance of a conflict. ## 19.17 Independence Profile **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured account of organizational, financial, methodological, informational, operational, publication, intellectual, political, and security independence. --- # 20. Transparency and Information-Access Terms ## 20.1 Transparency **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Availability of sufficient information to understand relevant decisions, methods, interests, evidence, and limitations. ## 20.2 Opacity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Lack of visibility into relevant methods, evidence, decisions, or system behavior. ## 20.3 Confidentiality **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection of information from unauthorized disclosure. ## 20.4 Secrecy **Status:** Discouraged unless describing intentional concealment **Preferred alternatives:** - Confidential - restricted - protected - nonpublic ## 20.5 Public Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information available without access restriction. ## 20.6 Controlled Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information available only under defined access and use conditions. ## 20.7 Confidential Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Nonpublic information protected by legal, contractual, security, privacy, or institutional duties. ## 20.8 Restricted Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Sensitive information subject to stronger access limitations than ordinary confidential material. ## 20.9 Redaction **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Removal or obscuring of information before disclosure. ## 20.10 Public Summary **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A nontechnical or reduced-detail account of a finding or process suitable for public release. ## 20.11 Disclosure Level **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A defined category governing who may access information and under what conditions. ## 20.12 Need to Know **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Access principle limiting information to people whose role requires it. ## 20.13 Least Privilege **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Access principle granting only the minimum permissions necessary for a role or task. ## 20.14 Information Hazard **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information whose creation or disclosure may materially increase risk. ## 20.15 Responsible Disclosure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Coordinated reporting and communication of vulnerabilities, incidents, or sensitive findings in a manner intended to support remediation and reduce harm. ## 20.16 Publication Right **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The right to communicate findings subject to defined legal, security, and confidentiality constraints. ## 20.17 Publication Veto **Status:** Preferred critical term **Definition:** Power to prevent publication of a finding. **Usage note:** A reviewed party should not possess unrestricted publication veto over independent conclusions. --- # 21. Security Terms ## 21.1 Information Security **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection of information confidentiality, integrity, and availability. ## 21.2 Cybersecurity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection of digital systems, networks, software, data, and services against unauthorized activity or disruption. ## 21.3 Model Security **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection of model weights, access, behavior, interfaces, and associated assets against theft, compromise, or misuse. ## 21.4 Weight Security **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Protection of model weights from unauthorized access, theft, copying, or modification. ## 21.5 Secure Evaluation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evaluation performed under controls appropriate to the sensitivity of the model, tasks, evidence, and outputs. ## 21.6 Secure Enclave **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A controlled technical environment designed to isolate sensitive computation or data. ## 21.7 Sandbox **Status:** Preferred technical term **Definition:** An isolated environment limiting the effect of system actions. **Do not confuse with:** Regulatory sandbox. ## 21.8 Air Gap **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** Physical or logical separation from external networks. ## 21.9 Threat Surface **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The set of points through which a system may be attacked or compromised. ## 21.10 Attack Surface **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The exposed components, interfaces, permissions, and pathways available to an attacker. ## 21.11 Security Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An event compromising or threatening confidentiality, integrity, availability, access control, or system security. ## 21.12 Security Classification **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A category governing protection, access, handling, and disclosure of information or assets. ## 21.13 Dual-Use Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information with legitimate beneficial uses and plausible harmful uses. ## 21.14 Sensitive Capability Information **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Information about model capabilities, methods, or weaknesses whose disclosure may increase misuse or security risk. --- # 22. Incident Terms ## 22.1 Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An event or condition that caused, could have caused, or revealed material harm, failure, compromise, misuse, or loss of control. ## 22.2 AI Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An incident in which an AI model or system materially contributed to the event, condition, or consequence. ## 22.3 Safety Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An incident involving unacceptable risk or harm related to system safety. ## 22.4 Evaluation Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An event compromising evaluation validity, integrity, security, evidence, or interpretation. ## 22.5 Misuse Incident **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Harmful or prohibited use of an AI system. ## 22.6 Near Miss **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An event that could have caused material harm but did not, because of chance, detection, intervention, or incomplete progression. ## 22.7 Adverse Event **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** An event producing harm or unacceptable effect. ## 22.8 Failure **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Inability of a system, process, control, or institution to fulfill an intended function or requirement. ## 22.9 Failure Mode **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A specific way in which a system, process, control, or institution can fail. ## 22.10 Root Cause **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An underlying cause or set of causes whose correction would materially reduce recurrence. ## 22.11 Contributing Factor **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A condition that increased the likelihood or severity of an incident without being the sole cause. ## 22.12 Corrective Action **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Action taken to eliminate or reduce the cause of a detected failure or nonconformity. ## 22.13 Preventive Action **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Action taken to reduce the likelihood of a potential failure or incident. ## 22.14 Remediation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Action taken to correct, contain, or repair a problem. ## 22.15 Incident Response **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The organized process of detecting, assessing, containing, communicating, remediating, and learning from an incident. ## 22.16 Incident Report **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured record of an incident, evidence, impact, response, and lessons. ## 22.17 Incident Taxonomy **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A classification system for incident types, severity, causes, and effects. --- # 23. Interoperability Terms ## 23.1 Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability of distinct systems, protocols, organizations, or jurisdictions to exchange, interpret, and use information or evidence effectively. ## 23.2 Semantic Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Shared or mapped meaning among terms, classifications, and data elements. ## 23.3 Syntactic Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Compatibility in data structure, format, encoding, and transmission. ## 23.4 Technical Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ability of technical systems, tools, APIs, schemas, and environments to work together. ## 23.5 Measurement Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ability to interpret and compare measurements produced by different methods, task sets, or institutions. ## 23.6 Institutional Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ability of institutions with different mandates and structures to coordinate and rely on one another's work. ## 23.7 Legal Interoperability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Ability to map or coordinate evidence and requirements across legal systems while preserving jurisdictional authority. ## 23.8 Harmonization **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reduction of differences among requirements, methods, or standards. **Distinction:** Interoperability can exist without full harmonization. ## 23.9 Compatibility **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which systems, methods, or requirements can operate together without unacceptable conflict. ## 23.10 Comparability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which results can be meaningfully compared. ## 23.11 Equivalence **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A determination that different methods, requirements, or systems achieve sufficiently comparable outcomes for a defined purpose. ## 23.12 Crosswalk **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured mapping between terms, requirements, controls, classifications, or standards. ## 23.13 Concordance **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A mapping showing relationships among multiple vocabularies or classification systems. ## 23.14 Bridge Study **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An analysis connecting results across protocols, versions, languages, forms, or systems. ## 23.15 Common Core **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The stable shared elements used across multiple implementations or jurisdictions. ## 23.16 Local Extension **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented addition or adaptation specific to a domain, language, jurisdiction, or institution. ## 23.17 Localization **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Adaptation of a protocol, standard, or system to local language, law, culture, infrastructure, or professional practice. ## 23.18 Translation Validity **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The degree to which translation preserves the intended construct and interpretation. ## 23.19 Federated Evaluation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evaluation in which models, data, tasks, or evidence remain distributed while coordinated methods produce shared results. ## 23.20 Evidence Portability **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The ability to reuse and interpret evidence across organizations, schemes, or jurisdictions. ## 23.21 Recognition Drift **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Deterioration in the validity of a recognition arrangement after methods, standards, institutions, or systems change. ## 23.22 Interoperability Debt **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Accumulated cost created by incompatible terminology, formats, identifiers, protocols, and institutional arrangements. --- # 24. Registry and Identity Terms ## 24.1 Registry **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A maintained authoritative or verified record of systems, protocols, evaluators, certificates, incidents, mappings, or recognition status. ## 24.2 Register **Status:** Accepted **Definition:** A maintained list or record. **Usage note:** Use *registry* for structured institutional systems. ## 24.3 Record Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A unique value used to identify a record. ## 24.4 Persistent Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An identifier intended to remain stable over time. ## 24.5 Model Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A unique identifier for a model artifact or release. ## 24.6 System Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A unique identifier for a defined AI system configuration. ## 24.7 Protocol Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A unique identifier for an evaluation protocol and version. ## 24.8 Evaluator Identifier **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A unique identifier for an evaluator organization or qualified unit. ## 24.9 Evidence Package **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured set of artifacts supporting a claim, review, certification, recognition, or decision. ## 24.10 Manifest **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A structured record identifying components, versions, configuration, provenance, and integrity information. ## 24.11 System Manifest **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A manifest identifying the material components and configuration of an AI system. ## 24.12 Signed Record **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A record protected by a digital signature or equivalent integrity mechanism. ## 24.13 Status Record **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A record indicating whether an item is current, expired, suspended, withdrawn, corrected, or superseded. --- # 25. Versioning and Document-Control Terms ## 25.1 Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An identified state of a document, protocol, system, model, standard, or schema. ## 25.2 Major Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A version containing material changes that may break compatibility, alter meaning, change decisions, or require re-evaluation. ## 25.3 Minor Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A version containing substantive but backward-compatible improvement. ## 25.4 Patch Version **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A version containing corrections or clarifications without intended substantive change. ## 25.5 Revision **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A documented change to a document, protocol, standard, or system. ## 25.6 Amendment **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A formally approved change to an existing document or rule. ## 25.7 Change Log **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A record of changes across versions. ## 25.8 Revision Record **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A formal summary of document version, date, change type, and rationale. ## 25.9 Current **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** The active and applicable version or record. ## 25.10 Draft **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Work not yet approved for canonical use. ## 25.11 Proposed **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Submitted for review or adoption but not yet approved. ## 25.12 Approved **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Formally accepted through the applicable process. ## 25.13 Active **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** In current operational use. ## 25.14 Expired **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** No longer valid because its defined validity period ended. ## 25.15 Suspended **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Temporarily inactive or invalid pending review, correction, or resolution. ## 25.16 Withdrawn **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Formally removed from current use or recognition. ## 25.17 Superseded **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Replaced by a newer approved version. ## 25.18 Deprecated **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Still available for transition or historical use but no longer preferred. ## 25.19 Retired **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Removed from active use after planned discontinuation. ## 25.20 Archived **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Preserved for historical or evidentiary purposes but not active. ## 25.21 Corrected **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Modified to address error while preserving a visible correction record. ## 25.22 Reissued **Status:** Preferred status **Definition:** Issued again after correction or formal update. ## 25.23 Effective Date **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The date on which a version, decision, or requirement becomes applicable. ## 25.24 Expiration Date **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The date after which a version, result, certificate, or recognition is no longer valid unless renewed. ## 25.25 Review Date **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The scheduled date for reassessment. --- # 26. Status of Evaluation Results ## 26.1 Valid Result **Status:** Context-specific **Definition:** A result that meets the defined validity requirements for its stated purpose. **Usage note:** Valid does not mean universally true. ## 26.2 Current Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result still applicable to the identified system, protocol, configuration, and period. ## 26.3 Expired Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result whose validity period has ended. ## 26.4 Superseded Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result replaced by a newer evaluation or interpretation. ## 26.5 Corrected Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result modified after error identification, with the original and correction history preserved. ## 26.6 Withdrawn Result **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A result formally removed because of invalidity, serious error, conflict, compromise, or other material reason. ## 26.7 Inconclusive **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evidence is insufficient to support a defined positive or negative conclusion. ## 26.8 Indeterminate **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A determination cannot be made within the available evidence, scope, or method. ## 26.9 Not Demonstrated **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** The evaluation did not produce sufficient evidence that the claimed capability or condition was present under the tested conditions. **Distinction:** Not demonstrated is not the same as absent. ## 26.10 Demonstrated With Qualifications **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evidence supports the claim subject to stated limitations or conditions. ## 26.11 Partially Substantiated **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Evidence supports only part of the claim. ## 26.12 Substantiated **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Available evidence sufficiently supports the claim within the stated scope. ## 26.13 Not Substantiated **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Available evidence does not sufficiently support the claim. --- # 27. Incentive and Recognition Terms ## 27.1 Incentive **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A condition that changes the expected benefit, cost, status, opportunity, or consequence associated with behavior. ## 27.2 Intrinsic Motivation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Motivation arising from interest, purpose, mastery, identity, or satisfaction inherent in the activity. ## 27.3 Extrinsic Motivation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Motivation arising from external reward, sanction, status, access, or requirement. ## 27.4 Prestige **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Durable esteem or status granted by a relevant community or institution. ## 27.5 Recognition **Status:** Preferred, see Section 15 **Additional meaning:** Formal or informal acknowledgment of contribution, competence, or achievement. ## 27.6 Award **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Formal recognition granted under stated criteria. ## 27.7 Prize **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reward offered for achieving a defined objective. ## 27.8 Bounty **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A reward offered for identifying a specified vulnerability, failure, flaw, or contribution. ## 27.9 Grant **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Funding provided to support research, infrastructure, training, public-interest work, or capacity. ## 27.10 Contribution Credit **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Attribution of value to people or organizations responsible for a contribution. ## 27.11 Corrective Credit **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Recognition for timely disclosure, correction, remediation, or withdrawal of invalid work. ## 27.12 Prestige Capture **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Control of recognition systems by actors able to convert existing status into further authority or reward. ## 27.13 Recognition Inflation **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Decline in the meaning of a designation as awards, badges, certificates, or titles proliferate. ## 27.14 Goodhart Effect **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Degradation of a measure's value when it becomes a target for optimization. ## 27.15 Reward Hacking **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Maximizing the measured reward while avoiding or undermining the intended goal. ## 27.16 Crowding Out **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** Reduction of intrinsic or prosocial motivation after external rewards or controls are introduced. ## 27.17 Public Good **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** A good whose benefits are broadly shared and difficult to restrict to paying contributors. ## 27.18 Free Rider **Status:** Preferred **Definition:** An actor that benefits from shared infrastructure or risk reduction without contributing proportionately. --- # 28. Standards Body Public-Claims Vocabulary ## 28.1 Preferred Phrases Use: - Independent research and institutional-design project - Developing foundations for frontier AI - Canonical working white paper - Proposed framework - Draft protocol - Pilot specification - Independent review - Qualified evaluator - Evidence under specified conditions - Met the defined requirement - Not demonstrated under the tested conditions - Current project position - Subject to revision - Does not constitute certification or regulatory approval ## 28.2 Discouraged Phrases Avoid unless precisely justified: - Official - approved AI - safe model - global authority - universal standard - industry consensus - experts agree - certified secure - government-grade - validated safe - trusted AI - fully compliant - guaranteed - proven harmless - risk-free - failsafe - unbiased ## 28.3 Prohibited Phrases for Present Standards Body Status Do not use: - Official AI Standards Body - Frontier AI regulator - AI accreditation authority - AI certification authority - Government-approved framework - Standards Body approved model - Standards Body certified safe - Legally compliant according to Standards Body - Internationally recognized standard, unless formal recognition exists - Licensed AI evaluator, unless a lawful licensing regime applies --- # 29. Critical Distinction Table | Terms | Canonical distinction | |---|---| | Model vs system | A model is a learned computational component. A system includes configuration, tools, interfaces, safeguards, infrastructure, and operational context. | | Capability vs risk | Capability is ability. Risk combines likelihood, consequence, exposure, actor, access, and safeguards. | | Safety vs compliance | Safety concerns acceptable risk. Compliance concerns fulfillment of applicable obligations. | | Test vs evaluation | A test is a procedure. Evaluation includes design, administration, scoring, interpretation, and limitations. | | Benchmark vs protocol | A benchmark is a standardized comparison instrument. A protocol is the complete specification governing an evaluation. | | Public benchmark vs held-out evaluation | A public benchmark is visible. A held-out evaluation protects material to preserve evidentiary value. | | Review vs audit | Review examines evidence and reasoning. Audit is systematic, independent, documented, and criteria-based. | | External vs independent | External means outside the organization. Independent means sufficiently free from controlling influence. | | Assurance vs certification | Assurance is evidence-supported confidence. Certification is formal third-party attestation under a defined scheme. | | Certification vs accreditation | Certification concerns conformity of a product, process, service, person, or management system. Accreditation recognizes the competence of the body performing conformity assessment. | | Conformity vs compliance | Conformity is fulfillment of specified requirements. Compliance usually concerns binding legal, regulatory, or contractual obligations. | | Standard vs requirement | A standard is a document or agreed framework. A requirement is a condition that must be fulfilled. | | Voluntary vs nonbinding | Voluntary concerns adoption. A voluntarily adopted contract or scheme can create binding obligations. | | Recognition vs approval | Recognition accepts evidence, competence, process, or status for a defined purpose. Approval is formal acceptance by an authorized body. | | Validation vs verification | Validation asks whether something is suitable for intended use. Verification asks whether specified requirements were fulfilled. | | Harm vs hazard | Harm is adverse effect. A hazard is a source or condition with potential to cause harm. | | Safeguard vs guarantee | A safeguard reduces risk. It does not guarantee absence of harm. | | Not demonstrated vs absent | Not demonstrated means evidence was insufficient under tested conditions. Absent is a stronger claim requiring evidence of absence. | | Confidence vs certainty | Confidence expresses justified belief. Certainty implies no meaningful uncertainty. | | Consensus vs unanimity | Consensus is broad agreement after addressing substantial objections. Unanimity requires agreement by all. | | Transparency vs full disclosure | Transparency provides sufficient visibility. Full disclosure may be unsafe, unlawful, or unnecessary. | | Interoperability vs uniformity | Interoperability supports exchange and use across differences. Uniformity requires sameness. | | Equivalence vs comparability | Comparability allows meaningful comparison. Equivalence supports acceptance as sufficiently similar for a stated purpose. | --- # 30. Capitalization Rules ## 30.1 Proper Names Capitalize: - Standards Body - Foundations for Frontier AI - Names of formal organizations - Formal document titles - Formal program names - Defined committee names ## 30.2 Generic Terms Use lowercase for generic references: - standard - evaluation - certification body - accreditation body - regulator - protocol - working group ## 30.3 Foundation Titles Use title capitalization in headings: - Foundation 1: Dynamic Evaluation Protocols Use lowercase in ordinary generic references: - the dynamic evaluation protocols foundation ## 30.4 Artificial Intelligence Use *AI* after first use where clear. ## 30.5 Frontier AI Capitalize only at the start of a sentence or within a proper title. ## 30.6 Standards Body Files Use exact uppercase filenames in code formatting: - `PROJECT_IDENTITY.md` - `TERMINOLOGY.md` - `FOUNDATION_01_DYNAMIC_EVALUATION_PROTOCOLS.md` --- # 31. Abbreviation Rules ## 31.1 First Use Write the full term followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Example: > conformity-assessment body (CAB) ## 31.2 Avoid Unnecessary Abbreviations Do not abbreviate a term used only a few times. ## 31.3 Approved Common Abbreviations - AI, artificial intelligence - API, application programming interface - CAB, conformity-assessment body - COI, conflict of interest, only where unambiguous - RAG, retrieval-augmented generation - TEVV, test, evaluation, validation, and verification ## 31.4 Ambiguous Abbreviations Avoid abbreviations that can refer to multiple concepts without explicit definition. ## 31.5 File and Protocol Identifiers Identifiers may use standardized abbreviations if defined in the applicable registry or schema. --- # 32. Hyphenation and Style Rules ## 32.1 Preferred Forms Use: - third-party - first-party - second-party - high-stakes - open-weight - public-interest - risk-based - capability-based - performance-based - decision-relevant - model-level - system-level - cross-border - cross-institutional - machine-readable - human-readable - version-specific - scope-specific - evidence-based ## 32.2 Artificial Intelligence Terms Use: - AI system - AI model - AI evaluation - AI governance Do not hyphenate *AI* as a prefix unless part of a longer compound requiring clarity. ## 32.3 Em Dashes Standards Body canonical documents should not use em dashes. Use: - commas - semicolons - parentheses - colons - separate sentences ## 32.4 Slashes Use slashes sparingly. Prefer explicit conjunctions when meaning matters. ## 32.5 Quotation Marks Use quotation marks for: - Direct quotations - terms under analysis - exact public claims Do not use quotation marks to signal vague skepticism. --- # 33. Introducing New Terms A new canonical term should be introduced only when: - Existing terms are inadequate - The concept is materially distinct - The term improves precision - A definition can be written - Related terms can be mapped - The term can be translated or localized where relevant - The term will be used beyond one isolated sentence ## 33.1 Required Proposal Fields - Proposed term - definition - purpose - scope - examples - related terms - distinctions - source or rationale - status - owner - version ## 33.2 Review New terms should be reviewed by relevant technical and institutional experts. ## 33.3 Temporary Terms Exploratory papers may use temporary terms if marked as provisional. ## 33.4 Avoid Coining for Prestige Do not create new terminology merely to brand ordinary concepts as proprietary. --- # 34. Revising Terms A term should be revised when: - Evidence changes - usage becomes misleading - legal meaning changes - international mapping reveals ambiguity - scope expands or narrows - implementation shows conflict - a superior term becomes established ## 34.1 Material Revision A material change to meaning requires: - New version - change record - affected-document review - compatibility note - transition guidance ## 34.2 Nonmaterial Revision Spelling, grammar, or clarification without meaning change may be treated as a patch. ## 34.3 Deprecation Deprecated terms should identify: - Replacement term - reason - transition period - historical mapping ## 34.4 Retirement Retired terms remain discoverable for historical interpretation. --- # 35. Translation and Localization Rules ## 35.1 Concept Before Word Translate the concept, not only the literal word. ## 35.2 Preserve Institutional Distinctions Terms such as: - audit - certification - accreditation - regulator - standard - compliance may have jurisdiction-specific legal meanings. ## 35.3 Translation Record A translated controlled vocabulary should record: - Source language - target language - translator - domain reviewer - date - version - non-equivalent terms - local notes ## 35.4 No Forced Equivalence Where no exact equivalent exists, preserve the source term and explain the distinction. ## 35.5 Legal Review Legal terms require qualified jurisdiction-specific review. --- # 36. Terminology Governance ## 36.1 Owner The canonical owner is Standards Body. ## 36.2 Stewardship Function A future terminology steward or committee should: - Maintain definitions - review proposals - map external vocabularies - resolve conflicts - manage translations - publish revisions - track deprecated terms ## 36.3 Contributor Input Contributors may propose changes through a documented process. ## 36.4 Decision Standard Terminology decisions should consider: - Precision - usability - technical validity - institutional meaning - legal implications - international mapping - public interpretation - existing practice ## 36.5 Dissent Material unresolved disagreement should be recorded. ## 36.6 Emergency Correction A misleading or harmful definition may be corrected through an expedited process followed by full review. --- # 37. Terminology Quality Tests Before approving a term, ask: ## 37.1 Definition Test Can the term be defined without circular language? ## 37.2 Distinction Test Is it materially different from related terms? ## 37.3 Evidence Test Does the term imply more evidence than is usually available? ## 37.4 Authority Test Does it imply legal or institutional authority? ## 37.5 Scope Test Can the term be used with explicit scope? ## 37.6 Public Interpretation Test Would a reasonable reader misunderstand it? ## 37.7 International Test Can it be mapped across jurisdictions and languages? ## 37.8 Operational Test Can the term support a decision, record, protocol, or standard? ## 37.9 Stability Test Is the term likely to remain useful as the field changes? ## 37.10 Anti-Branding Test Is the term needed for precision rather than prestige? --- # 38. Deprecated and Discouraged Vocabulary Register | Term | Status | Preferred replacement or instruction | |---|---|---| | Safe AI | Discouraged | State the assessed requirement, risk level, or safeguard performance | | Certified safe | Prohibited | Certified against named requirements within scope | | AI approval | Discouraged | State the approving authority and exact decision | | Official framework | Discouraged | Approved by named body, or published framework | | Secret test | Discouraged | Held-out evaluation | | AI watchdog | Discouraged for Standards Body | Independent research or oversight organization, as applicable | | AI audit, without criteria | Discouraged | Name the audit criteria and scope | | Accredited model | Prohibited | Models may be certified or assessed; bodies are accredited | | Self-accredited | Prohibited | Internally qualified or independently reviewed | | Validated safe | Prohibited | Validated for a defined intended use, or met defined safeguard criteria | | Fully compliant | Discouraged | Compliant with named requirements as of a defined date | | Unbiased model | Prohibited as an absolute claim | Evaluated for defined bias or disparity measures | | Failsafe | Prohibited as an absolute claim | Fault-tolerant or protected by defined controls | | Risk-free | Prohibited | Residual risk assessed as low under stated conditions | | Proven harmless | Prohibited | No material harm observed under assessed conditions | | Global consensus | Discouraged | State participating institutions and degree of agreement | | Experts agree | Discouraged | Identify expert population, evidence, and dissent | | Best practice | Discouraged | Recommended practice or current leading practice | | Kill switch | Discouraged | Emergency shutdown, access revocation, or deployment suspension | | Black box, without definition | Discouraged | State which information or access is unavailable | | Hallucination, for every factual error | Discouraged | Unsupported output, fabrication, factual error, or confabulation, as applicable | | Alignment, without object | Discouraged | State alignment with whose objective, values, policy, or intent | | Responsible AI, without criteria | Discouraged | State the practices, framework, or responsibility at issue | | Trustworthy AI, without evidence | Discouraged | State the assessed reliability, safety, security, transparency, or governance properties | --- # 39. High-Risk Ambiguity Register The following terms require special care because they are frequently used to imply more than they establish. ## 39.1 Alignment Always state: - Aligned with what objective? - Whose intent or values? - Under which conditions? - How measured? ## 39.2 Safety Always state: - Safe from which harm? - For which user and context? - Under which assumptions? - For what period? ## 39.3 Trustworthy Always state the properties supporting trust. ## 39.4 Robust Always state the perturbation, threat, shift, or condition. ## 39.5 Secure Always state the threat model and scope. ## 39.6 Independent Always state relevant relationships, access, funding, and authority. ## 39.7 Validated Always state: - What was validated? - For which intended use? - By whom? - Under which method? ## 39.8 Audited Always state the criteria, scope, period, and auditor. ## 39.9 Certified Always state the scheme, requirements, issuer, subject, scope, and validity. ## 39.10 Accredited Always state the accreditation body and scope. ## 39.11 Compliant Always state the applicable requirement and jurisdiction. ## 39.12 Frontier Always state the relevant capability, time, or comparison basis where material. --- # 40. Canonical Usage Examples ## 40.1 Capability Result Preferred: > The system demonstrated the defined cyber capability under Protocol CYBER-AGENT 1.2 with tool access, five attempts per task, and a 90-minute task limit. Avoid: > The model is cyber-capable. ## 40.2 Negative Result Preferred: > The evaluation did not demonstrate the capability under the tested conditions. Avoid: > The model cannot perform the task. ## 40.3 Safeguard Result Preferred: > The safeguard reduced attack success under the stated threat model, but adaptive attacks remained outside scope. Avoid: > The safeguard makes the model safe. ## 40.4 Independent Review Preferred: > The report received independent external review under a documented mandate with access to raw evaluation records. Avoid: > Experts verified the report. ## 40.5 Audit Claim Preferred: > The organization underwent an independent audit against the specified control framework for the period stated. Avoid: > The company was audited and approved. ## 40.6 Certification Claim Preferred: > The management system was certified against the named standard by the identified certification body within the published scope. Avoid: > The AI was certified safe. ## 40.7 Accreditation Claim Preferred: > The evaluator is accredited for the listed testing scope by the named accreditation body. Avoid: > The evaluator is officially accredited for AI. ## 40.8 Standards Body Identity Preferred: > Standards Body is an independent research and institutional-design project. Avoid: > Standards Body is the official authority for frontier AI. ## 40.9 International Recognition Preferred: > The result is recognized for the defined technical purpose under the named arrangement. Avoid: > The result is globally approved. ## 40.10 Compliance Preferred: > The organization reported conformity with the named voluntary standard and compliance with the stated legal requirement as of the review date. Avoid: > The organization is fully compliant. --- # 41. Alphabetical Quick Reference This quick reference lists preferred terms and the sections containing full definitions. ## A - Accreditation, Section 15 - Accreditation body, Section 15 - Accountability, Section 18 - Agent, Section 5 - Agentic system, Section 5 - AI model, Section 5 - AI system, Section 5 - Appeal, Section 18 - Approval, Section 15 - Assessment, Section 14 - Assurance, Section 14 - Attestation, Section 14 - Audit, Section 14 - Authority, Section 4 - Autonomy, Section 5 ## B - Baseline, Section 10 - Benchmark, Section 9 - Benchmark gaming, Section 9 - Benchmark saturation, Section 9 - Binding requirement, Section 16 - Bounty, Section 27 - Bridge study, Section 23 - Burden of proof, Section 12 ## C - CAB, Section 14 - Calibration, Section 10 - Canonical source, Section 4 - Capability, Section 6 - Capability domain, Section 6 - Capability profile, Section 6 - Capability threshold, Section 6 - Certificate, Section 15 - Certification, Section 15 - Certification body, Section 15 - Certification scheme, Section 15 - Chain of custody, Section 12 - Claim, Section 12 - Code of conduct, Section 16 - Code of practice, Section 16 - Committee, Section 18 - Comparability, Section 23 - Compatibility, Section 23 - Compliance, Section 17 - Confidence, Section 10 - Conformity, Section 17 - Conformity assessment, Section 14 - Consensus, Section 18 - Construct, Section 10 - Construct validity, Section 10 - Contamination, Section 9 - Control, Section 8 - Corrective action, Section 22 - Corrective credit, Section 27 - Critical capability, Section 6 - Crosswalk, Section 23 - Current, Section 25 ## D - Dangerous capability, Section 6 - Decision right, Section 18 - Defense in depth, Section 8 - Demonstrated capability, Section 6 - Deployment, Section 5 - Deployment context, Section 5 - Deprecated, Section 25 - Direct evidence, Section 12 - Disclosure, Section 19 - Dissent, Section 13 - Distribution shift, Section 10 - Dynamic evaluation protocol, Section 9 ## E - Effective capability, Section 6 - Elicitation, Section 11 - Elicitation budget, Section 11 - Epistemic status, Section 12 - Equivalence, Section 23 - Evaluation, Section 9 - Evaluation awareness, Section 9 - Evaluation harness, Section 9 - Evaluation incident, Section 22 - Evaluation integrity, Section 9 - Evaluation protocol, Section 9 - Evaluator, Section 14 - Evidence, Section 12 - Evidence package, Section 24 - Evidence standard, Section 12 - External review, Section 13 ## F - Failure, Section 22 - Failure mode, Section 22 - False negative, Section 10 - False positive, Section 10 - Fine-tuning, Section 5 - First-party assessment, Section 14 - Foundation model, Section 5 - Framework, Section 16 - Frontier AI, Section 5 - Frontier AI system, Section 5 - Frontier model, Section 5 ## G - General-purpose AI model, Section 5 - Good practice, Section 16 - Goodhart effect, Section 27 - Governance, Section 18 - Governance framework, Section 18 - Grant, Section 27 - Guidance, Section 16 ## H - Harm, Section 7 - Harmonization, Section 23 - Hazard, Section 7 - Held-out evaluation, Section 9 - High-stakes capability, Section 6 - High-stakes risk, Section 7 - Human baseline, Section 10 - Human oversight, Section 8 ## I - Impact, Section 7 - Impartiality, Section 19 - Incident, Section 22 - Incident response, Section 22 - Independence, Section 19 - Independent expert review, Section 13 - Inference, Section 12 - Information hazard, Section 20 - Inspection, Section 14 - Institutional capture, Section 18 - Institutional design, Section 4 - Institutional legitimacy, Section 18 - Interoperability, Section 23 ## J - Jurisdiction, Section 4 ## K - Knowledge gap, Section 12 ## L - Latent capability, Section 6 - Legal interoperability, Section 23 - Likelihood, Section 7 - Limited assurance, Section 14 - Localization, Section 23 ## M - Management-system standard, Section 16 - Mandate, Section 4 - Manifest, Section 24 - Material conflict, Section 19 - Measurement uncertainty, Section 10 - Metric, Section 10 - Minority report, Section 13 - Misuse, Section 7 - Model family, Section 5 - Model identifier, Section 24 - Model security, Section 21 - Model version, Section 5 - Monitoring, Section 8 - Mutual recognition, Section 15 ## N - Near miss, Section 22 - Negative result, Section 12 - Noncompliance, Section 17 - Nonconformity, Section 17 - Not demonstrated, Section 26 ## O - Objectivity, Section 19 - Open question, Section 12 - Open-source AI, Section 5 - Open-weight model, Section 5 - Oversight, Section 18 ## P - Peer review, Section 13 - Performance standard, Section 16 - Phase-in, Section 16 - Post-training, Section 5 - Prestige, Section 27 - Primary source, Section 12 - Progressive requirement, Section 16 - Project, Section 4 - Proposed standard, Section 16 - Protocol identifier, Section 24 - Public claim, Section 4 - Public-interest review, Section 13 ## Q - Quorum, Section 18 ## R - Reasonable assurance, Section 14 - Recognition, Section 15 - Recommended practice, Section 16 - Registry, Section 24 - Reliability, Section 6 and Section 10 - Remediation, Section 22 - Replication, Section 9 - Reproducibility, Section 12 - Requirement, Section 16 - Residual risk, Section 7 - Responsible disclosure, Section 20 - Review, Section 13 - Review mandate, Section 13 - Risk, Section 7 - Risk threshold, Section 7 - Robustness, Section 6 ## S - Safe harbor, Section 16 - Safeguard, Section 8 - Safeguard effectiveness, Section 8 - Safety, Section 7 - Sandbagging, Section 9 - Sandbox, Section 21 - Score, Section 10 - Scoring rule, Section 10 - Second-party assessment, Section 14 - Security, Section 7 - Security incident, Section 21 - Severity, Section 7 - Standard, Section 16 - Standards Body, Section 4 - Substantiated, Section 26 - Sunset clause, Section 16 - System identifier, Section 24 - System manifest, Section 24 - System prompt, Section 5 - System version, Section 5 - Systemic risk, Section 7 ## T - Task, Section 9 - Task family, Section 9 - Task horizon, Section 6 - Technical review, Section 13 - Technical specification, Section 16 - Test, Section 9 - Testing, Section 9 - Third-party assessment, Section 14 - Third-party evaluator, Section 14 - Threat, Section 7 - Threat model, Section 7 - Threshold, Section 10 - Traceability, Section 12 - Transparency, Section 20 - Triangulation, Section 12 ## U - Uncertainty, Section 10 - Unilateral recognition, Section 15 - Unanimity, Section 18 ## V - Validation, Section 9 - Verification, Section 9 - Version, Section 25 - Vulnerability, Section 7 ## W - Weight of evidence, Section 12 - Weight security, Section 21 - Working group, Section 18 - Working paper, Section 4 --- # 42. Terminology Interfaces With Other Canonical Files ## 42.1 `PROJECT_IDENTITY.md` Governs project identity, public role, authority, and approved descriptions. ## 42.2 `EVIDENCE_STANDARDS.md` Will govern evidentiary sufficiency, source quality, confidence, citation, and claims. ## 42.3 `RESEARCH_METHODOLOGY.md` Will govern how research questions, evidence, expert input, and correction are handled. ## 42.4 `TAXONOMY.md` Will organize terms into formal categories and hierarchical relationships. ## 42.5 `EVALUATION_PHILOSOPHY.md` Will govern Standards Body's conceptual approach to measurement, capability, risk, thresholds, and uncertainty. ## 42.6 `GOVERNANCE_FRAMEWORK.md` Will govern formal roles, decision rights, committees, conflicts, appeals, and accountability. ## 42.7 `STANDARDS_DEVELOPMENT_PROCESS.md` Will govern the use of *draft*, *proposed*, *approved*, *standard*, *revision*, and *retired* within standards work. ## 42.8 `TRANSPARENCY_FRAMEWORK.md` Will govern disclosure levels, confidentiality, redaction, public summaries, and restricted evidence. ## 42.9 `EVALUATOR_ACCREDITATION_FRAMEWORK.md` Will govern accreditation terminology within a formal evaluator-recognition system. ## 42.10 `WEBSITE_SOURCE_OF_TRUTH.md` Will apply this terminology to exact public website language. --- # 43. Canonical Terminology Commitments Standards Body commits to: 1. Use evaluation, review, audit, certification, and accreditation as distinct terms. 2. Use capability and risk as distinct concepts. 3. Use model and system as distinct concepts. 4. Avoid absolute safety claims. 5. State the scope of compliance claims. 6. State the scheme and scope of certification claims. 7. State the accreditation body and scope of accreditation claims. 8. Avoid calling external review independent without supporting conditions. 9. Distinguish not demonstrated from absent. 10. Distinguish evidence recognition from legal approval. 11. Carry uncertainty with evaluation results. 12. Identify system and protocol versions. 13. Use current status labels. 14. Preserve deprecated and retired terms for historical interpretation. 15. Avoid terminology created mainly for institutional prestige. 16. Correct misleading terms when discovered. 17. Document material changes in meaning. 18. Support multilingual and jurisdiction-specific mappings. 19. Keep public language consistent with present authority. 20. Treat terminology as operational infrastructure rather than editorial decoration. --- # 44. Final Terminology Position Frontier AI standards cannot be credible when the language supporting them is unstable. A project cannot claim to build trustworthy evaluation while using: - audit as a synonym for review - certification as a synonym for approval - accreditation as a synonym for reputation - safety as a synonym for passing a test - capability as a synonym for risk - external as a synonym for independent - compliance as a synonym for good practice - international as a synonym for globally recognized - not demonstrated as a synonym for impossible These distinctions are not semantic formalities. They determine what institutions believe, what the public understands, what purchasers rely upon, what regulators enforce, and what developers can claim. Standards Body therefore treats terminology as foundational infrastructure. The vocabulary should make every important claim answerable. What was evaluated? Which system? Under which protocol? By whom? With what access? Against which requirement? Under which authority? With what uncertainty? For how long? Within which jurisdiction? The purpose of this file is not to make the project sound more technical. It is to make the project harder to misunderstand. The canonical rule is: > **Use the term that matches the function, the evidence, the scope, and the authority actually present.** --- # Revision Record ## Version 1.0 **Date:** July 16, 2026 **Change type:** Complete foundational edition **Summary:** Establishes the canonical Standards Body controlled vocabulary. Defines project, AI system, capability, risk, safeguard, evaluation, measurement, elicitation, evidence, review, audit, assurance, certification, accreditation, standards, requirements, compliance, governance, independence, transparency, security, incidents, interoperability, registries, versioning, result status, incentives, public claims, usage distinctions, capitalization, abbreviations, hyphenation, term introduction, revision, translation, governance, quality tests, discouraged vocabulary, ambiguity controls, examples, alphabetical reference, file interfaces, and terminology commitments. **Status:** Approved foundational source.