Skip to content

AIB-C01 deep review — September 28, 2026

The complete guide, all 58 detailed skills, and the concepts/in-scope/out-of-scope appendices were reviewed. The broad-domain snapshot matches the accepted baseline. The published outline still states 130 minutes without a clear standard-only qualifier; the credential page lists a 170-minute, 85-question beta. That discrepancy remains visible rather than being explained away as a confirmed standard-form contract. September 29 delivery is still a scheduled future event; no new retirement notice was found in the reviewed official sources.

Learner changes

  • Add four original worked cases: adoption/realized-value sensitivity, review staffing, activation versus completed work, and mandatory release/provider-transition gates. Preserve 36 answered checks and add four, for 40 total.
  • Flag AWS's CAF-AI whitepaper as historical. Retain useful capability concepts while directing implementation checks to current documentation; the NIST page still describes AI RMF 1.0 as under revision.
  • Add the early-adopter badge deadline without converting it into a GA date. Preserve official practice-exam unavailability during beta.
  • Replace unverified paid-course runtimes with labeled planning estimates. Skill Builder sign-in shells do not verify the 13-module contents; the module count is attributed to the launch announcement.
  • Keep Places to learn as the final public section.

Article selection

Chris Hennesey's cost article (June 25, 2026) supports outcome ownership and scenario forecasting; savings percentages and cost trends were not adopted as guarantees. Matthias Patzak's foundations article (May 7, 2026) supports use-case-led capability investment, with minimum release controls preserved. Both public bodies were read; underlying third-party studies were not audited.

The August 25 shadow-AI governance article was inspected but not added: its useful approved-tool idea is already covered, and inconsistent percentages plus broad legal/product claims would need further verification. The receipt preserves that intake decision without endorsing the claims.

Validation and boundaries

Seventeen local assertions checked the original arithmetic. Eight document exercises remain proposed; no stakeholder workshop, live business case, AWS lab, paid course or complete ISO standard was evaluated. Human review remains pending.

The operational receipt stores dated fetches, original records, hashed skills and section references. Candidate snapshots were compared to accepted files without advancing them. Repository, learning-catalog and site gates are recorded once complete.