Skip to content

Reference and glossary

ItemValue
FrameworkNIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework
Published baselineAI RMF 1.0, NIST AI 100-1
Published26 January 2023
NatureVoluntary
FunctionsGOVERN, MAP, MEASURE, MANAGE
Categories19
Core outcomes72
Companion implementation resourceNIST AI RMF Playbook
Generative AI companionNIST AI 600-1
Gamut assessment scopeOne selected AI system
Assessment structureCurrent Profile and Target Profile

The set of functions, categories and subcategories that provides outcomes for managing AI risk.

A high-level group of AI risk-management activity:

  • GOVERN.
  • MAP.
  • MEASURE.
  • MANAGE.

A group of related outcomes within a function.

A more specific Core outcome. Gamut uses stable short IDs such as GV-1.1, MP-2.2, ME-2.7 and MG-4.1 for navigation.

A tailoring of the AI RMF Core to a use case, sector, technology, organisation or system.

The assessed present position for the selected system.

The intended future risk-management position.

The difference between Current and Target Profiles. It should drive treatment, evidence, testing, ownership and monitoring.

NIST’s voluntary companion resource containing suggested actions related to Core outcomes. It is not a mandatory checklist.

  • Valid and reliable.
  • Safe.
  • Secure and resilient.
  • Accountable and transparent.
  • Explainable and interpretable.
  • Privacy-enhanced.
  • Fair, with harmful bias managed.

Testing, evaluation, verification and validation.

A person or organisation performing a role in the AI lifecycle, such as developer, deployer, operator, evaluator, affected individual or supplier.

The combined interaction of technology, people, organisations, processes and context.

The level and type of risk an organisation is prepared to accept in pursuit of objectives.

No defensible determination has been made.

The outcome is absent or materially ineffective.

Some elements operate, but material gaps remain.

The outcome operates for the selected system and is sufficiently supported.

These are Gamut assessment labels, not NIST maturity levels.

Assertion only.

Design documentation and ownership reviewed.

System-specific operating evidence supports implementation.

Operating evidence, effective testing and adverse-finding review support the conclusion.

Foundational assessment depth retained in the Profile.

System facts make the outcome particularly relevant.

The context calls for deeper system-specific evidence, testing or review.

These are Gamut planning labels, not NIST severity ratings.

Evidence that is relevant, scoped, current, authentic, sufficiently complete and reviewed.

A request for a specific artefact or operating record needed to support an outcome.

A bounded procedure with objective, expected result, pass criteria, safety limits and actual result.

A documented gap, failed test, unsupported assumption, exception or adverse condition requiring action or risk decision.

Information that contradicts or weakens a positive conclusion, such as a failed test, open finding, incident or rejected evidence.

Risk remaining after current practices, evidence, limitations and treatment are considered.

A change or event requiring review before the normal review date.

NIST AI 600-1, a cross-sectoral companion Profile for generative AI.

  1. CBRN information or capabilities.
  2. Confabulation.
  3. Dangerous, violent or hateful content.
  4. Data privacy.
  5. Environmental impacts.
  6. Harmful bias and homogenisation.
  7. Human-AI configuration.
  8. Information integrity.
  9. Information security.
  10. Intellectual property.
  11. Obscene, degrading or abusive content.
  12. Value-chain and component integration.

A traceability reference between related framework concepts. It is not automatic equivalence.

An accountable human sign-off on the recorded Profile at a point in time. It is not NIST certification.

The framework itself is voluntary. Other law, regulation, contract or policy may independently require risk-management activity.

Does NIST certify AI systems against the AI RMF?

Section titled “Does NIST certify AI systems against the AI RMF?”

The Gamut assessment must not be represented as NIST certification or endorsement.

No. The Core is outcome-oriented, and the Playbook is a voluntary set of suggestions.

No. Tailor effort to context and risk, while explicitly considering the Core and documenting the reason for priority.

No. Achieved describes the outcome. Assured describes the strength of support.

Can an outcome be Not achieved at Assured depth?

Section titled “Can an outcome be Not achieved at Assured depth?”

Yes. Strong evidence and testing can confirm a real gap.

Not by itself. System-specific implementation and effectiveness matter.

Does a mapped GTSAF or ISO control prove a NIST outcome?

Section titled “Does a mapped GTSAF or ISO control prove a NIST outcome?”

No. It may provide relevant evidence or implementation support, but the NIST outcome still needs direct assessment.

No. It provides advisory analysis for human review.

No. Access remains subject to the user’s authorised workspace, role, plan and feature availability.

Review the Profile, evidence, tests, findings, priorities and conclusion. Material change may require a new assessment basis.

It is the published baseline described here. NIST states that a revision is in progress. Check the official AI RMF page for current status.

Gamut applies the voluntary NIST AI RMF 1.0 Core to a named AI system through Current and Target Profiles, separates outcome from assurance strength, links evidence, testing and findings, adds the NIST Generative AI Profile when relevant, and keeps final risk decisions with accountable humans.