Free Practice Questions for IAPP AIGP Exam

The correct answer is C because understanding algorithmic methodology is primarily a design, development, and model evaluation activity rather than part of a deactivation or sunset risk strategy. A deactivating risk strategy focuses on safely retiring or discontinuing an AI system, ensuring that operational, legal, and business risks are properly managed. This includes evaluating regulatory requirements such as data retention and deletion obligations, assessing business continuity and financial implications, and understanding dependencies with upstream and downstream systems to avoid disruption. These steps ensure a controlled and compliant system shutdown. In contrast, analyzing algorithmic methodology is relevant during system development, validation, and explainability efforts, not during the decommissioning phase of the AI lifecycle.

The EU AI Act explicitly prohibits the use of AI systems for social scoring by public authorities, as it can lead to discrimination and unfair treatment of individuals based on their social behavior or perceived trustworthiness. While AI can be used to promote equitable distribution of welfare benefits, manage border control, and even detect an individual ' s intent for law enforcement purposes (within strict regulatory and ethical boundaries), implementing social scoring systems is not permissible under the Act due to the significant risks to fundamental rights and freedoms.

The correct answer isC. Thechoice of architecture(e.g., neural networks vs. decision trees) is typically part of thedesign and developmentphase, not the initial planning.

From the AIGP Body of Knowledge – AI Lifecycle Module:

“Planning involves scoping, context definition, stakeholder identification, governance planning, and assumptions—not yet model selection.”

Confirmed in the ILT Participant Guide:

“Design decisions such as architecture or algorithm type come after planning—usually during development based on technical feasibility and data availability.”

The best reason for GVC to offer students the choice to utilize generative AI in limited, defined circumstances is to enable students to learn how to use AI as a supportive educational tool. By integrating AI in a controlled manner, students can learn the practical applications of AI and develop skills to use AI responsibly and effectively in their educational pursuits.

The Singapore Model AI Governance Framework recommends several measures to promote the responsible use of AI, such as determining the level of human involvement in decision-making, adapting governance structures, and establishing communications and collaboration among stakeholders. However, employing human-over-the-loop protocols is not specifically mentioned in this framework. The focus is more on integrating human oversight appropriately within the decision-making process rather than exclusively employing such protocols. Reference: AIGP Body of Knowledge, section on AI governance frameworks.

A multi-modal model is an AI system that can process and analyze multiple types of data, such as text, video, images, and sound. This type of AI integrates different data sources to enhance its understanding and decision-making capabilities. In the given scenario, the AI technology that tags content including names of animals, humans, and objects falls under this category. Reference: AIGP BODY OF KNOWLEDGE, which outlines the capabilities and use cases of multi-modal models​​.

The White House Executive Order of November 2023 designates the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) as the responsible body for creating guidelines to conduct red-teaming tests of AI systems. NIST is tasked with developing and providing standards and frameworks to ensure the security, reliability, and ethical deployment of AI systems, including conducting rigorous red-teaming exercises to identify vulnerabilities and assess risks in AI systems.

While transparency is encouraged,publicly disclosing forecasts of secondary harmsisnot a required or standard practicefor internal performance evaluation. Risk assessments and reporting typically remaininternal or shared with regulators.

From theAI Governance in Practice Report 2025:

“Organizations must assess secondary risks… but disclosure is subject to context, regulatory requirements, and risk management discretion.” (p. 30)

The primary reason the EU is considering updates to its Product Liability Directive is to address digital services and connected products. The current directive does not adequately cover the complexities and challenges posed by modern digital and connected technologies. By updating the directive, the EU aims to ensure that it remains relevant and effective in addressing the liabilities associated with these advanced products, ensuring consumer protection and fair market practices in the digital age.

The correct answer is Explainable Ai because it specifically refers to the ability of a system to describe the logic behind its decisions or output in a way that is understandable to humans. This is a key part of regulatory and ethical frameworks and is directly related to addressing the black-box problem in AI.

From the AIGP ILT Participant Guide (Module on Transparency and Explainability):

“Explainability refers to the understanding of how a black-box model works. The black-box problem exists because some models are too complex for human interpretation. Explainability methods aim to provide meaningful insight into the logic and decision-making of AI systems.”

Also, according to the AI Governance in Practice Report 2025:

“Explainability refers to the representation of the underlying mechanisms of the AI system’s operation... a key tenet of AI governance due to the desire to understand how AI systems are built, managed and maintained.”

Thus, while Trustworthy and Responsible AI are broader concepts,explainabilityspecifically targets the regulatory concern about understanding outputs.

===========