Terms related to machine learning · 3.3.3
human-machine teaming
putting human interaction together with machine intelligence in one working arrangement
What this term settles
The definition fixes what human-machine teaming means inside this vocabulary and, just as usefully, where the boundary sits. A reader who means something wider or narrower is using a different term and should say so.
Who it binds
A definition binds nobody on its own, so the force of human-machine teaming comes only from the reader who adopts it in a policy, a contract, a data schema or an assurance argument.
What to do in your practice
Take the firm's own definition of human-machine teaming, put it beside this one and mark the differences. Each difference is either a deliberate local choice or an inconsistency to fix.
Evidence an auditor or regulator asks for
- A controlled vocabulary entry for human-machine teaming with the citation 3.3.3, an owner and a review date.An auditor can check that human-machine teaming is controlled rather than assumed.
- A model record that names the algorithm, the training run and the parameters that changed. The row names human-machine teaming.Shows human-machine teaming in use in the artefact the firm relies on, not only in a glossary.
- A training log with the data version, the criteria and the result. The record carries the human-machine teaming entry and its date.The model record names the vendor product but not the algorithm or the training run, so the term cannot be traced to an artefact. The gap is tested against human-machine teaming.
Common gaps this page catches
- human-machine teaming is used in the model and training record without a written definition, so two teams can mean different things.
- A supplier uses human-machine teaming with a different boundary and nobody has recorded the difference.
What to prepare before the amendment lands
Brief the owners who use human-machine teaming most often, then ask each to return one artefact that shows the entry in use. File the artefacts against the register row.
How to test it here
Take one live artefact rather than a template, find the sentence or field where human-machine teaming is used, and put this page beside it. Record the answer, the artefact and the date, because that record is the evidence and a glossary entry on its own is only an intention.
What this page does not claim
The page does not reproduce the standard, certify the firm or predict the wording the amendment will use; it states human-machine teaming at the claim level "definition" and stops where the public record stops.
Common questions
- What does human-machine teaming mean in ISO 22989?
- putting human interaction together with machine intelligence in one working arrangement
- What evidence should we keep for 3.3.3?
- A controlled vocabulary entry for human-machine teaming with the citation 3.3.3, an owner and a review date. A model record that names the algorithm, the training run and the parameters that changed. The row names human-machine teaming.
- Is human-machine teaming a requirement?
- No: human-machine teaming is a definition or clause of a terminology standard, and it becomes binding only when a firm writes it into a policy, a contract or a procedure, or when another standard incorporates it.
Related units
Source. ISO/IEC 22989:2022, Clause 3.3.3, Terms and definitions. Open the ISO public entry. Retrieved 21 October 2026.
https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso-iec:22989:ed-1:v1:en
ISO catalogue record 88145, the amendment status, stage and dates. Catalogue record 74296, the base standard.
Claim level: definition. The definition is in the public preview. This page states it in our own words and does not reproduce the text.
Last updated: 2026-10-21 · Markdown version · Check your vocabulary