A defect rooted in training data can be a design: Considering | AIGP
7-day money-back guarantee — full refund within 7 days of purchase if you've completed under 20% of the questions. See pricing →
Certifications Tools Flashcards Career Paths Exam Guides Blog Pricing For Teams About

Language

✓ EnglishDeutschEspañolFrançaisPortuguês
Check readiness — free →

A defect rooted in training data can be a design: Considering product liability law, which statement is most

AIGP Understanding How Laws, Standards and Frameworks Apply to AI Hard

A training-data defect can be a design or manufacturing defect, and inadequate warnings or failure to remediate raise the manufacturer's product-liability exposure.

The question

A manufacturer ships a home robot whose AI occasionally misjudges obstacles and causes injuries; the defect traces to training data, and the company pushes model updates after sale. Considering product liability law, which statement is most defensible?

Preparing for AIGP? Take the free 5-min readiness quiz →

  1. Liability is impossible because AI behavior is probabilistic, so any harm from an unpredictable model output is legally treated as user misuse rather than a product defect.
    Plausible-sounding but probabilistic behavior does not immunize a product; a design or manufacturing defect causing foreseeable harm can still ground product liability.
  2. A defect rooted in training data can be a design or manufacturing defect, and inadequate warnings plus a failure to remediate through updates can each increase the manufacturer's exposure.
    Correct: product liability reaches design/manufacturing defects and inadequate warnings, and an AI defect from training data with unaddressed post-sale risks heightens exposure.
  3. Because the company issues post-sale software updates, it is fully shielded from liability for earlier harms, since the availability of a later patch retroactively cures any original defect.
    Almost plausible but a later patch does not retroactively cure harm already caused, and failing to remediate known risks can itself add exposure.
  4. Responsibility rests solely with the component supplier that provided the training data, so the manufacturer that designed and sold the finished robot bears none of the product-liability risk.
    Plausible but the manufacturer that designs and places the finished product on the market generally bears product-liability responsibility, regardless of a supplier's role.
The trap
Believing probabilistic AI behavior or a later software update eliminates product-liability exposure.

How to remember it

A training-data defect can be a design or manufacturing defect, and inadequate warnings or failure to remediate raise the manufacturer's product-liability exposure.

How many of these would you get right?

One of 1581 AIGP questions on Certsqill. Take a free five-minute check and see your score per domain — not one number, but which section to open tonight.

Test your AIGP readiness — free

More Understanding How Laws, Standards and Frameworks Apply to AI questions

Part of the Certsqill AIGP question bank · Understanding How Laws, Standards and Frameworks Apply to AI · Every answer, right and wrong, comes with its own explanation.