This sample demonstrates report architecture only. It does not certify an AEDT, employer, vendor or dataset and must not be reused as evidence of an actual bias audit.
1. Audit scope
Illustrative AEDT: ExampleRank v3.2. Use: candidate ranking for a fictional NYC hiring workflow. Output family: continuous score. Audit period: fictional 12-month historical dataset.
2. Data basis
The sample assumes historical data with documented outcome semantics, sex and race/ethnicity categories, controlled unknown states and a defined analysis population. No demographic values are inferred.
3. Methodology
The sample follows the score-output structure in 6 RCNY §5-301: full-sample median, category scoring rates and impact ratios for sex, race/ethnicity and intersectional categories, with documented treatment of unknowns.
| Category | N | Scoring rate | Impact ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Example Category A | 420 | 0.58 | 1.000 |
| Example Category B | 315 | 0.49 | 0.845 |
| Example Category C | 205 | 0.46 | 0.793 |
4. Limitations and auditor notes
A professional report should distinguish regulatory calculations from professional judgment, identify exclusions and unknown states, document data provenance and avoid converting a single ratio into an automatic discrimination or LL144 pass/fail conclusion.
5. What a standard client receives
A standard AUDITLL144 engagement produces a technical audit report for the client and a separate publication-ready Summary of Results. Confidential evidence, candidate-level records, access logs and internal integrity controls stay outside the public disclosure layer.
Outside the standard scope unless separately agreed: legal advice, employer-side publication or candidate-notice execution, AEDT remediation/redesign, and materially different additional AEDTs or deployment contexts.
View the synthetic public Summary of Results Start a scope review