§ The result
Rippling leads Infor Talent Science on 6 of the 7 criteria.
Rippling scores 56 and Infor Talent Science 49 under rubric v1.0, a 7-point gap across the ATS-integrated and Assessment cohorts. Rippling leads 6 of the 7 criteria and the remaining criterion is level, so Infor Talent Science is ahead on none of them; the closest of the 6 Rippling leads is Post-Market Monitoring, Infor Talent Science 45 to Rippling 47. One criterion, Article 11 Technical Documentation, is both the widest raw gap (Infor Talent Science 58, Rippling 73) and the heaviest weighted swing, and at 20% weight it makes up 41% of the weighted advantage Rippling holds across the 6 criteria it leads.
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.
Vendor profile
Rippling
Rippling Recruiting is an applicant tracking system within Rippling's all-in-one HR/IT/finance platform that uses AI to review and screen job applications, summarize interviewer feedback, transcribe video interviews, flag application fraud, and automate interview scheduling.
§ The record
Infor Talent Science is filed under Assessment AI, Rippling under ATS-integrated AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of NYC LL 144, EU AI Act and Colorado AI Act. Only Infor Talent Science is in scope of Illinois HB 3773 and Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Infor Talent Science | Rippling |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Enterprise | High |
| Headquarters | US | US |
| Founded | 2002 | 2016 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 41% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Infor Talent Science 58 · Rippling 73
3.0 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 62% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Infor Talent Science 35 · Rippling 45
1.5 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 78% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Infor Talent Science 50 · Rippling 60
1.2 weighted points to Rippling
15% weight · 92% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Infor Talent Science 57 · Rippling 64
1.1 weighted points to Rippling
8% weight · 97% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Infor Talent Science 60 · Rippling 64
0.3 weighted points to Rippling
12% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Infor Talent Science 45 · Rippling 47
0.2 weighted points to Rippling
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to -7.3 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 7.3 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads -7 beside that -7.3.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Infor Talent Science minus Rippling.
| Category | Weight | Infor Talent Science | Rippling | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 58 | 73 | -15 | -3.0 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 42 | 42 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 45 | -10 | -1.5 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 64 | -7 | -1.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 50 | 60 | -10 | -1.2 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 45 | 47 | -2 | -0.2 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 60 | 64 | -4 | -0.3 |
| Total | 100% | 49 (F) | 56 (F) | -7 | -7.3 |
§ 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 | Infor Talent Science | Rippling | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 27 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 12 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain |
Infor Talent Science has 34 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 27 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Rippling has 13 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 12 with a source URL, 1 documented absence.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 47 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 34 for Infor Talent Science, across 1 distinct source domain, and 13 for Rippling, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Infor Talent Science last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Rippling last reviewed
- July 17, 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