Checklist · AI decision systems
Record of a test for different results across groups
Record of a test, designed by the principal, comparing a system's outputs across groups the principal has chosen, with the outputs tabulated and the conclusion left to the principal.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- Australia
- AI use
- Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the 3 authorities it cites, for Australia.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when the principal has decided to test whether a decision system produces different outputs for different groups. Do not use it as a finding that the difference is lawful or unlawful.
Used for these tasks
Each task page says how far AI may help with the task and what the lawyer must review.
How AI may be used
AI may tabulate outputs the principal has already produced and count them. The principal designs the test and writes what the difference means.
AI may
- Build the results table from a spreadsheet of outputs the principal supplies
- Count how many outputs fall into the categories the principal has defined
AI must not
- Must not invent inputs, outputs or group labels
- Must not choose which groups to compare
- Must not state that a difference is or is not unlawful discrimination
The lawyer checks
- The test set, the groups and the definition of a different outcome were fixed before the outputs were counted
- The table matches the supplied outputs and does not drop rows
- The conclusion is the principal's, and it does not claim a statutory test that has not been read
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Read the full text
The full text is available after you log in. It is free. When you log in you can:
- read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
- copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
- add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
- let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.
The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.
More in AI decision systems
- Inventory of automated decisions that affect individuals
- Law firm AI use policy (master firm policy)
- Law firm generative AI use policy (United States)
- Approved AI tools register (template with field guide)
- Approval and training record for a generative AI tool (United States)
- AI vendor due-diligence questionnaire for law firms (master version)
- Legal risk table for a client's AI system
- How to mark generative AI output in the file (United States)
- AI incident response procedure for law firms (master procedure for all AI incidents)
- Record that a person reviewed an automated output
- File note of a generative AI confidentiality incident (United States)
- AI decision system impact and fairness assessment (firm or client systems)
- Reassessment when a model, purpose or provider changes
- Privacy policy clause on automated decisions (APP 1.7 to 1.9, from 10 December 2026)
All precedents for AI decision systems · Tasks and AI use in this area