3.5 Defined term
emergent behaviour
Observable behaviour that appears when one or more AI systems coordinate several capabilities of their components across more than one knowledge domain. The note names factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive domains.
What this settles
The term gives a name to behaviour that belongs to a combination rather than a component. Without it, teams attribute the outcome to one part and lose the pattern that produced it.
Who it binds
No one. It is a definition. It becomes operative when a system shows the behaviour and a description or an incident record refers to it.
What to do in your practice
Describe the coordination, the domains involved and the observed outcome. Test scenarios where components disagree or loop, and record the behaviour at the system level rather than assigning it to one component.
Evidence an auditor or regulator asks for
| A coordination map naming the domains and the components. | Shows where the combination arises. |
|---|---|
| A disagreement and loop scenario with the observed result. | Exercises the emergent level. |
| A system-level incident or near-miss note. | Captures evidence without misattributing it. |
What has the combination done that no component was designed to do?
Common gaps this page catches
- An unexpected outcome is logged against a single component.
- No scenario exercises disagreement or looping.
- The coordination pattern is undocumented, so the behaviour cannot be reproduced.
What to prepare before publication
Add the system-level scenario to the test plan and the system-level note to the incident template. The two changes together keep the pattern visible.
How to test it here
Take one live system rather than a template, find the field or sentence where emergent behaviour is used, and put this page beside it. Record the answer, the artefact and the date. A glossary entry on its own is an intention; a dated record beside a live artefact is evidence.
What this page does not claim
The page does not reproduce the draft, does not know the descriptor wording that the public preview withholds, and does not certify the system or the organisation. It states the unit at the claim level "defined term" and stops where the public record stops.
Common questions
- What does emergent behaviour mean in ISO/IEC DIS 42102?
- Observable behaviour that appears when one or more AI systems coordinate several capabilities of their components across more than one knowledge domain. The note names factual, conceptual, procedural and metacognitive domains.
- What evidence should we keep for 3.5?
- A coordination map naming the domains and the components. A disagreement and loop scenario with the observed result.
- Is emergent behaviour a requirement?
- No. The draft is a descriptive framework. It sets no management system requirement and no conformity test. It becomes binding only when a contract, a regulator or a management system adopts it.
Related units
Last updated: · Markdown version · Check your system