Comparison · two buyer workflows · one evidence system
Defense AI workflow vs Clinical AI workflow.
Use this when a buyer is comparing review paths. In both cases, the self-serve API gates the action and retains a sealed evidence record that compliance can inspect.
01 ·
Side-by-side.
Fleet · control context · audience · evidence contract
Fleet under measurementDefense AI workflow: battlestaff, intel cells, mission planning, and decision-support agents
Clinical AI workflow: clinical decision support, ambient documentation, utilization-management models, predictive DSI
Clinical AI workflow: clinical decision support, ambient documentation, utilization-management models, predictive DSI
Control contextDefense AI workflow: NIST AI RMF, OMB M-25-21/22, DoW RAI S&IP, CMMC evidence questions, DoW impact-level review planning
Clinical AI workflow: HHS §1557, HIPAA review context, FDA SaMD / PCCP, ONC HTI-1 predictive-DSI transparency, CMS utilization rules
Clinical AI workflow: HHS §1557, HIPAA review context, FDA SaMD / PCCP, ONC HTI-1 predictive-DSI transparency, CMS utilization rules
AudienceDefense AI workflow: program offices, ATO-package owners, JADC2 staff
Clinical AI workflow: health systems, clinical-AI committees, hospital compliance, payor IT
Clinical AI workflow: health systems, clinical-AI committees, hospital compliance, payor IT
Reference controlsBoth workflows draw from register 09; the views at /corpus/for/defense and /corpus/for/medicine frame the references for each audience.
Shared evidence systemThe same gate, route, seal, verify, and meter contract serves both paths. See the API reference.
02 ·
Which review path fits the buyer.
A one-line decision pin per workflow
Defense AI workflow. Pick when the buyer is a U.S. defense program office and the evidence must support authorization, CMMC, or impact-level review.
Clinical AI workflow. Pick when the buyer is a health system or payor and the question is §1557 algorithmic-non-discrimination, FDA SaMD lifecycle, or ONC HTI-1 DSI transparency.
If the question spans both domains, use the same self-serve API path and attach both control contexts to the evidence record. The record contract is shared; sufficiency remains evaluator-specific.