Release · worksheet · CSVtoCSA editorial

AI validation summary

Version 2.0 · Updated 2026-09-21 · Release

Reconcile the evidence, failures and operating restrictions into an assessable release decision.

Adapt this template to your intended use, applicable requirements, and approved procedures.

When to use it

Use when you need to reconcile the evidence, failures and operating restrictions into an assessable release decision.

Information needed before starting

  • Defined AI use, authority limits and assessed configuration
  • Controlled sources and independent reference results relevant to this worksheet
  • Applicable risk assessment, acceptance basis and responsible reviewers

Field instructions

  • Use and configuration: Identify the exact proposed use, users and evaluated configuration.
  • Applicable scope: Link the local GxP, record and jurisdiction assessment.
  • Evidence reviewed: List requirements, risks, supplier evidence, tests and reviewer evaluation.
  • Acceptance results: Report successes and failures by their stated criteria.
  • Traceability: Link each relevant requirement/risk to evidence and deviation disposition.
  • Open issues: State the impact of each unresolved deviation or dependency.
  • Conclusion and restrictions: Describe what is permitted, withheld or excluded, and why.
  • Operational readiness: Identify record, monitoring, incident, change and periodic-review arrangements.
  • Approval responsibility: Identify required local approval roles; do not invent a signature.
  • Reconsideration triggers: State the additional evidence needed before changing the decision.

Completed fictional example

Fictional VSR-01 records a withheld expansion, not a successful production validation.

Decision itemCompleted example
ConfigurationPRA-01 v0.8 / M-2026-09-eval / P-03 / PAR-02 / RET-04
EvidenceIU-01, SYS-01, GXP-01, SUP-01, TP-01, HR-01 and RTM-01
Failed criteriaTwo AI critical misses; one final assisted critical miss; two false findings accepted
Other checks6/6 permission, 12/12 record-package and 4/4 failure/recovery checks pass within planned scope
Open issuesDEV-01/02/03 and SUP-G01 remain open
ConclusionExpanded production reliance not approved; restricted evaluation may continue only within its authorized boundary
Required evidenceCorrect causes; evaluate fresh protected cases and representative users; resolve material supplier and operational gaps

Blank template

System / record ID: ____________________

Prepared by / date: ____________________

Required review / approval under local procedure: ____________________

FieldYour entry
Use and configuration____________________
Applicable scope____________________
Evidence reviewed____________________
Acceptance results____________________
Traceability____________________
Open issues____________________
Conclusion and restrictions____________________
Operational readiness____________________
Approval responsibility____________________
Reconsideration triggers____________________
Relevant regulations and guidance

These sources apply within their stated scope. The suggested worksheet fields, test designs and fictional decisions are practitioner recommendations, unless a source requirement is expressly identified. Completing a template does not establish compliance.

Computer Software Assurance for Production and Quality Management System Software ↗

Regulatory guidance / GMP guideline · United States · February 2026

Scope: Medical-device manufacturers assuring software used in production or their quality management system.

Relevance: For medical-device production or QMS software, supports selecting assurance activities from intended use, risk and available evidence. It is nonbinding guidance and does not determine other sectors’ obligations.

Status: Final / published · Checked 2026-09-21

Publication identity, scope and status checked against the linked official source. This is not an independent audit of every retained guide statement.

Read source details and applicability →

EudraLex Volume 4, Annex 11 — Computerised Systems ↗

Regulatory guidance / GMP guideline · European Union · January 2011 revision

Scope: Computerised systems supporting activities in the applicable EU pharmaceutical GMP context.

Relevance: For computerised systems used in EU GMP activities, informs lifecycle, supplier and record controls. Confirm applicability to the actual activity; the example does not establish it.

Status: Final / published · Checked 2026-09-21

The Commission index confirms the January 2011 operative revision. The linked PDF could not be retrieved in this check; retained detailed section mappings need review against an authorized copy.

Read source details and applicability →

Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and NIST AI 600-1 ↗

Industry guidance / framework · United States · AI RMF 1.0 (2023); GenAI Profile (2024)

Scope: Cross-sector AI governance and risk management, including generative AI.

Relevance: A voluntary framework for describing AI risks, evaluation and ongoing management. Its suggested practices are not regulatory requirements.

Status: Final / published · Checked 2026-09-21

Publication identity, scope and status checked against the linked official source. This is not an independent audit of every retained guide statement.

Read source details and applicability →
Was this useful? Leave feedback

Was this resource useful?

Was this template clear and useful? Tell us which instruction or field could be improved.

Loading contribution options…

Questions and moderated discussion

Questions and discussion

Ask a question or share a perspective. Contributions are reviewed before publication.

Loading contribution options…

Suggest a correction

Sent privately to the editorial moderation queue. Your account email and correction are not published as a comment. Do not include confidential or personal information.

Resource: AI validation summary

Loading sign-in status…

Correction details