Free Isaca AAIA Actual Exam Questions - Question 3 Discussion

Maybe B makes sense since testing with curated data can directly show if the model treats different groups fairly, unlike metadata or interviews which might be less concrete.

C imo, interviewing developers can uncover design intentions and potential blind spots in the model that data alone might not reveal. Developers might also explain why certain biases exist or how they tried to mitigate them, which is useful context for fairness. It’s not just about numbers; understanding the human side helps too. Plus, relying purely on data or observation might miss underlying reasons behind certain behaviors. So, getting insights straight from the source can add another layer of reliable evidence during an audit.

D Watching real interactions helps catch unexpected biases in real time, which metadata or curated sets might miss. It’s direct evidence of fairness from the user perspective.

It’s A because metadata reveals patterns and possible biases without relying on sample quality.

I think B is the best option because testing with curated data gives clear evidence of how the model behaves across different cases.