§ The result
4 points separate Infor Talent Science and Cegid.
Infor Talent Science holds a 4-point edge over Cegid under rubric v1.0, 49 to 45, across the Assessment and ATS-integrated cohorts. Infor Talent Science leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Bias Audit Transparency, while Cegid leads 2, including Human Oversight Design. Bias Audit Transparency is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — Cegid 30, Infor Talent Science 42 — and at an 18% weight it carries 42% of the weighted advantage Infor Talent Science holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
Cegid
Cegid's HR suite offers two recruiting lines: Cegid HR Talent Acquisition (ex-DigitalRecruiters), an ATS/CRM with CV parsing, scorecards, automated scoring and an AI conversational agent that pre-qualifies candidates on career sites and WhatsApp, and Cegid Talentsoft (now sold as Cegid HR Suite) recruiting, whose 'Recruiting Match' matches positions to candidates algorithmically.
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
Cegid is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Infor Talent Science under Assessment AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Infor Talent Science is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Cegid | Infor Talent Science |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | FR | US |
| Founded | 1983 | 2002 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
18% weight · 37% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Cegid 30 · Infor Talent Science 42
2.2 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
20% weight · 64% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Cegid 50 · Infor Talent Science 58
1.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
12% weight · 74% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Cegid 55 · Infor Talent Science 50
0.6 weighted points to Cegid
12% weight · 84% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Cegid 40 · Infor Talent Science 45
0.6 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Cegid 32 · Infor Talent Science 35
0.4 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
15% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Cegid 55 · Infor Talent Science 57
0.3 weighted points to Infor Talent Science
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Cegid 62 · Infor Talent Science 60
0.2 weighted points to Cegid
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to -4.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -4 beside that -4.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Cegid minus Infor Talent Science.
| Category | Weight | Cegid | Infor Talent Science | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 50 | 58 | -8 | -1.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 30 | 42 | -12 | -2.2 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 35 | -3 | -0.4 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 55 | 57 | -2 | -0.3 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 55 | 50 | +5 | +0.6 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 40 | 45 | -5 | -0.6 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 62 | 60 | +2 | +0.2 |
| Total | 100% | 45 (F) | 49 (F) | -4 | -4.3 |
§ 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 | Cegid | Infor Talent Science | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 6 | 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 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 33 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
Cegid has 39 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 33 with a source URL, 6 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 73 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 39 for Cegid, across 2 distinct source domains, and 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Cegid last reviewed
- September 25, 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