✅ Competence Verification Checklist (AITL)

This document defines the competence verification checklist for AITL-based education and training.

It is used to confirm that training outcomes are demonstrated, explainable, and responsibility-preserving, not merely completed.

This checklist is aligned with ISO 9001 Clause 7.2 (Competence) and is applicable to all roles defined in the AITL Training Plans.

---

1️⃣ Purpose

The purpose of this checklist is to:

• ✅ Verify that training has resulted in actual competence, not just attendance
• 🧭 Confirm that AITL responsibility boundaries are correctly understood
• 🚫 Prevent unsafe delegation of design or control responsibility to AI or tools
• 📘 Provide an auditable record of competence verification

This checklist is used in conjunction with training records defined in
03_Training_Record.

---

2️⃣ Verification Principles

Competence verification under AITL is based on the following principles:

• 🧠 Explainability over automation
• ⚖ Responsibility over convenience
• 📐 Causal understanding over pattern recognition
• 🛡 Human accountability over AI authority

Verification must confirm understanding and judgment,
not familiarity with tools or frameworks.

---

3️⃣ General Verification Items (All Roles)

The following items apply to all roles.

Item	Verification Question	Pass / Fail	Notes
GV-1	Can the trainee explain AITL responsibility separation (PID / FSM / NN–RL / LLM) without ambiguity?
GV-2	Can the trainee clearly state where AI assistance is not allowed?
GV-3	Can the trainee identify who is responsible for final design decisions?
GV-4	Can the trainee explain system behavior using physical and causal reasoning?
GV-5	Can the trainee explain why LLMs are restricted to non-real-time use?

---

4️⃣ Design Engineer Verification Items

Applicable to trainees following Plan_Design_Engineer.

Item	Verification Question	Pass / Fail	Notes
DE-1	Can the trainee justify architectural decisions based on physical constraints?
DE-2	Can the trainee explain why AI outputs are non-authoritative?
DE-3	Can the trainee identify scenarios requiring design recovery?
DE-4	Can the trainee explain risks of delegating design judgment to AI?
DE-5	Can the trainee communicate design boundaries to stakeholders?

---

5️⃣ Control Engineer Verification Items

Applicable to trainees following Plan_Control_Engineer.

Item	Verification Question	Pass / Fail	Notes
CE-1	Can the trainee explain PID control behavior and stability reasoning?
CE-2	Can the trainee explain FSM supervision and mode transitions?
CE-3	Can the trainee identify when adaptive assistance must be disabled?
CE-4	Can the trainee recognize loss of controllability or unsafe operation?
CE-5	Can the trainee justify exclusion of LLMs from real-time control?

---

6️⃣ AI System Architect Verification Items

Applicable to trainees following Plan_AI_System_Architect.

Item	Verification Question	Pass / Fail	Notes
AI-1	Can the trainee explain AI’s role as design-time support only?
AI-2	Can the trainee identify prohibited AI use cases in control systems?
AI-3	Can the trainee explain how AI outputs must be reviewed and validated?
AI-4	Can the trainee explain responsibility boundaries between AI and engineers?
AI-5	Can the trainee explain escalation to design recovery processes?

---

7️⃣ Verification Outcome

Verification is considered successful when:

• All applicable items are marked as Pass
• Any limitations or conditions are explicitly documented
• Responsibility boundaries are clearly acknowledged by the trainee

❌ Partial completion or tool proficiency alone is not sufficient.

---

8️⃣ Use in Training Records

Verification results shall be:

• 🔗 Referenced in training records (03_Training_Record)
• 🔍 Reviewed during audits or internal reviews
• 🔄 Used as input for improvement or corrective actions if gaps are identified

---

9️⃣ Summary

This checklist ensures that:

• Training outcomes are verifiable and explainable
• AI does not obscure engineering responsibility
• AITL principles are consistently applied across roles

🛡 Competence under AITL is defined by
understanding, judgment, and accountability.