Human override rate
A measurable indicator of whether a human review checkpoint is substantive: the frequency at which a human rejects or modifies an agent's proposed action. A rate near zero over a long period, especially paired with very fast review times, is a signal of automation bias rather than evidence of genuine oversight, and is one of the specific practices the Version 1.5 update added for auditing the effectiveness of human oversight.
Defined in 2 GAGE programs, which carry 4 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in Certified AI Governance Professional (CAIGP).
How each discipline defines it
The same term does different work depending on who is using it. These are the definitions as each program teaches them, unedited.
A measurable indicator of whether a human review checkpoint is substantive: the frequency at which a human rejects or modifies an agent's proposed action. A rate near zero over a long period, especially paired with very fast review times, is a signal of automation bias rather than evidence of genuine oversight, and is one of the specific practices the Version 1.5 update added for auditing the effectiveness of human oversight.
The frequency at which humans reject or modify agent actions during review. A low rate can indicate genuine agent quality or, per the MGF's own warning, rubber-stamping behaviour where a human checkpoint has stopped functioning as real review.
"The frequency at which humans reject or modify agent actions" (MGF p.30). A low or falling rate may signal rubber-stamping; the metric requires a baseline and ongoing tracking to be meaningful.
"the frequency at which humans reject or modify agent actions," a metric the framework names as a signal that "a low rate may signal rubber-stamping behaviours" (MGF v1.5, p.30).
Where it is taught
The exact lessons this term appears in. The first module of every program is free with a free account.
- Automation Bias · Meaningful Human Accountability, Certified Agentic AI Governance Professional (CAAGP)
- Dossier Workshop D: Accountability Map · Meaningful Human Accountability, Certified Agentic AI Governance Professional (CAAGP)
- Watching an Agent Work · Rollout, Monitoring, and Incident Response, Certified Agentic AI Governance Professional (CAAGP)
- The Singapore stack: voluntary on paper, adopted in practice · The World's Rulebooks, Certified AI Governance Professional (CAIGP)
Where it shows up at work
A definition is where Human override rate starts. The lessons above teach it inside the competencies below, which are what job descriptions ask for and what the GAGE credential records. Every link here is drawn from the same careers map that builds a role's readiness check.
Defines who reviews AI outputs, what they check, when they can override, and how to keep review from becoming a rubber stamp.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Knows when to trust, verify, escalate or override an AI recommendation, and stays accountable for the decision.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Recognizes hallucination, drift, skew, brittleness and biased outcomes, and knows how each one enters a system.
One lesson on this page teach it as a primary outcome.
Roles that hire for it
Each role page shows the full competency set, what the seat decides, and a readiness check against your own evidence.
- Ethical AI Specialistneeds it at depth · 5 open postings this week
- AI Product Manager, responsible product editionneeds it at depth · 3 open postings this week
- Responsible AI Leadneeds working knowledge · 7 open postings this week
- Operations Manager, AI-readyneeds it at depth
- AI Literacy Leadneeds working knowledge
- VP of AI Governance and Ethicsneeds working knowledge
How job descriptions say it
Postings rarely use the textbook word. These are the phrases the careers map reads as asking for the competencies above.
Where the frameworks place it: EU AI Act Article 14; ISO/IEC 42001 Annex A; NIST AI RMF GOVERN; NIST AI RMF MEASURE 2.
One interview question about it
Design the human oversight for an AI system that approves refunds. What does the reviewer see, and what stops rubber-stamping?
Asked of candidates for human oversight design. Answering it in your own words is exactly how a GAGE topic is passed, and the credential records the pass where an employer can check it.
If you come from another field
Some backgrounds already carry this competency, and the readiness check gives credit for it.
- Operations, claims, customer service and administration carries it as a claim to back up: Deciding when to escalate a case is judgment under uncertainty.
- A data science, statistics or analytics degree carries it as work you can show: Bias and failure modes were in your projects, not only your reading.
Terms it appears with
Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.