Direct answer
That evaluating an AI system for trustworthy characteristics involves documenting test sets, metrics and TEVV tooling, measuring performance under conditions similar to deployment, and documenting limits on generalisability beyond those conditions.
Answer contract
Apply the comparison lens only to the exact inspected source scope; do not infer authority from adjacent topics.
Evidence and exact locators
Inspected source 1 — MEASURE 2, subcategories 2.1, 2.3 and 2.5.. Supports: The bounded scope recorded in the reviewed specification.
What the evidence does not establish
A specification is not a route, a release, or a public page.
Rights and reuse
Rights basis recorded in the reviewed specification; link and bounded original paraphrase only.
Dependencies and related concepts
applies-to: urn:maha:concept:governance:model-evaluation
implemented-by: urn:maha:property:maha-strategies
evidence-for: urn:maha:concept:governance
Questions this page can answer
What does NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0), NIST AI 100-1 state about model-evaluation?
That evaluating an AI system for trustworthy characteristics involves documenting test sets, metrics and TEVV tooling, measuring performance under conditions similar to deployment, and documenting limits on generalisability beyond those conditions.
Which exact locator in that source supports the claim on this page?
Inspected source 1, MEASURE 2, subcategories 2.1, 2.3 and 2.5.
What does this source explicitly not establish about model-evaluation?
A specification is not a route, a release, or a public page.
Which canonical definition does this route depend on, and where is it owned?
applies-to: urn:maha:concept:governance:model-evaluation implemented-by: urn:maha:property:maha-strategies evidence-for: urn:maha:concept:governance
What would have to be inspected before this page could claim more than it does?
A source, locator, rights, scope, boundary, dependency, implementation, or release change requires a new exact-revision review.