title: “Validation” description: “Validation of AIGO framework content, governance artifacts, machine-readable components, and repository integrity.”
Validation
AIGO includes a validation layer for checking the structural integrity, internal consistency, traceability, and machine-readable behavior of the framework repository. Validation is an important part of maintaining AIGO as a controlled governance framework and implementation platform.Purpose
Validation helps determine whether AIGO repository content and machine-readable governance artifacts satisfy defined structural and consistency checks. Validation can identify: * broken or unresolved references * structural inconsistencies * missing relationships * incomplete governance coverage * invalid machine-readable artifacts * rule-definition errors * evaluation-fixture errors * orchestration configuration errors * document integrity problems * repository health issues Validation therefore supports the reliability and maintainability of the AIGO implementation.Validation layers
The repository contains validation across multiple areas.Repository validation
Repository-level validation examines the integrity of the documentation and supporting repository structure. This includes areas such as: * repository references * document integrity * repository health * framework consistency * structural relationshipsGovernance validation
Governance-oriented validation examines relationships and coverage across governance artifacts. This includes areas such as: * traceability * control coverage * evidence coverage * governance relationships * framework consistencyMachine-readable validation
Machine-readable artifacts are validated independently where applicable. This includes: * JSON schema validation * rule validation * evaluation fixture validation * evaluation semantics * orchestration validation These checks help ensure that machine-readable governance components conform to their defined structures and validation rules.Evaluation validation
AIGO includes a machine-readable evaluation layer in addition to the underlying governance schemas. Evaluation validation can examine: * rule definitions * rule semantics * evaluation fixtures * expected evaluation behavior * evaluation configuration * orchestration configuration The purpose is to verify that the defined evaluation components behave consistently with their intended machine-readable definitions. Evaluation validation should be distinguished from governance judgment. A passing evaluation does not by itself establish that an organization has satisfied a legal, regulatory, contractual, certification, or organizational requirement.Validation and governance
Validation is a supporting governance capability. A typical relationship is: governance requirement → governance artifact → validation → result → governance action A validation result may identify a condition requiring: * remediation * additional evidence * review * reassessment * configuration change * documentation correction * governance improvement Validation therefore provides information that can feed into the broader AIGO governance lifecycle.Validation and evaluation are different
Validation and evaluation should not be treated as the same activity. Validation asks whether an artifact, repository component, rule, fixture, or configuration satisfies defined structural or implementation checks. Evaluation applies defined governance rules or conditions to applicable governance information and produces an evaluation result. In simplified form: validation → verifies the implementation evaluation → applies defined governance logic Both can support governance, but they serve different purposes.Current validation baseline
The repository has progressed beyond the original documentation-only framework implementation. The current validation capability includes checks covering: * repository references * traceability * control coverage * evidence coverage * framework consistency * document integrity * repository health * rule definitions * rule semantics * evaluation fixtures * evaluation validation * orchestration configuration * orchestration validation The current baseline should be interpreted according to the validation scope and test results produced by the repository at a particular point in time.Validation results
A successful validation run means that the tested repository content or machine-readable artifacts satisfied the implemented validation checks within the relevant scope. It does not mean that: * the organization is legally compliant * the organization is certified * the organization is accredited * a regulatory obligation has been satisfied * an AI system is automatically safe * a governance decision is automatically correct * external framework conformity has been established Validation results must therefore be interpreted within their defined scope.Validation and continual improvement
Validation results can provide inputs to AIGO continual improvement. For example, recurring validation failures may indicate: * weaknesses in repository structure * incomplete governance relationships * inconsistent documentation * insufficient control coverage * inadequate evidence relationships * weaknesses in machine-readable governance definitions * problems in evaluation logic or orchestration These observations can become inputs to corrective action, improvement activities, or changes to the framework implementation.Canonical source
The validation tooling is maintained in:validation/
The validation test suite is maintained in:
validation/tests/
Machine-readable rules and evaluation components are maintained in their respective repository areas, including:
rules/
engine/
The repository’s validation tooling and test results should be treated as the authoritative source for the current implementation validation status.