§ The result
3 points separate Infor Talent Science and Arctic Shores.
Under rubric v1.0, Infor Talent Science and Arctic Shores finish 3 points apart, 49 to 46, as two Assessment entries. Arctic Shores takes 2 of the 7 criteria, Human Oversight Design among them, against 3 for Infor Talent Science, whose share includes Post-Market Monitoring, and 2 are level. Even Post-Market Monitoring, the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing (Arctic Shores 30, Infor Talent Science 45, 12% weight), is only 39% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science builds across the 3 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Arctic Shores
Arctic Shores sells a task-based psychometric assessment platform ("Una") that scores candidates on behaviour captured during short interactive tasks - covering personality, workplace intelligence and learning agility - rather than self-report questionnaires or CV review.
Vendor profile
Infor Talent Science
Infor Talent Science is a cloud-based pre-hire behavioral and cognitive assessment platform. It scores candidates against patented machine-learning 'Performance Profiles' built from the behavior and performance data of an employer's successful incumbents, and gives hiring teams fit scores, recommendations and interview questions that are used to rank and route applicants.
§ The record
Arctic Shores and Infor Talent Science are both filed under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, Illinois HB 3773, EU AI Act, Colorado AI Act and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Arctic Shores | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2013 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
12% weight · 32% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Arctic Shores 30 · Infor Talent Science 45
1.8 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
20% weight · 60% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Arctic Shores 50 · Infor Talent Science 58
1.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
18% weight · 82% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Arctic Shores 35 · Infor Talent Science 42
1.3 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 94% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Arctic Shores 56 · Infor Talent Science 50
0.7 weighted points to Arctic Shores
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Arctic Shores 64 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.3 weighted points to Arctic Shores
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 5 figures above sum to -3.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.7 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -3 beside that -3.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Arctic Shores minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | Arctic Shores | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 42 | -7 | -1.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 35 | - | - |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 57 | - | - |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 56 | 50 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 30 | 45 | -15 | -1.8 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 64 | 60 | +4 | +0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 49 (F) | -3 | -3.6 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Arctic Shores | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | — | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Arctic Shores has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 68 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Arctic Shores, across 1 distinct source domain, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Arctic Shores last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Infor Talent Science last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next