Conflict of Interest Policy

IDJÉ measures the behaviour of artificial intelligence systems and publishes the results. The value of that measurement depends on the reader knowing the result was not influenced by whoever paid for it.

This policy exists so that the question has a verifiable answer rather than a promise. It sets out which sources IDJÉ accepts funding from, what each person involved in an evaluation must declare, who is barred from taking part, and what is disclosed in the text of every published evaluation.

Provider: an organisation that develops or operates general-purpose artificial intelligence systems, including subsidiaries, controlled entities, funds and philanthropic arms.

Direct competitor: another organisation that also develops or operates general-purpose systems, and that therefore competes with the providers IDJÉ evaluates.

Linked person: anyone who works for, invests in, sits on the board of, or regularly consults for a provider or a direct competitor. The link may be the person's own or that of a spouse, partner or dependent.

Significant financial interest: direct equity in a provider or direct competitor, or variable compensation tied to the performance of those organisations. Indirect holdings the person does not manage, such as index funds and mutual funds, fall outside this definition.

Evaluation team: the set of people who influence the design, execution, review and publication of an evaluation, including contractors hired for that work.

IDJÉ does not accept money, sponsorship, API credits, cloud credits, compute, corporate subscriptions, free access to paid products or any other resource from a provider, from a direct competitor of a provider, or from a linked person in an individual donation.

The form of the resource does not change the rule. API credits received at no cost, event sponsorship, donated compute hours and unsolicited corporate discounts count the same as money transferred into an account. When IDJÉ uses a paid interface or an API, it pays the public price.

IDJÉ accepts philanthropy, institutional funding, public funding, publication revenue and service revenue, provided the payer does not fall under any case in item 03.

A contract with a buyer that is neither a provider nor a direct competitor, such as a company wanting to understand its own use of AI, a public body or a university, is covered by this item.

Anyone joining the evaluation team declares, on joining, once a year and whenever there is a change: direct equity in a provider or direct competitor; employment, contract, consulting, advisory work or a board seat at those organisations; variable compensation received from them; gifts, travel and accommodation paid for by them; a link through a spouse, partner or dependent to any of the preceding situations; and any other relationship a reasonable reader could consider capable of influencing the outcome of the evaluation.

The declaration is made in writing and kept on file. Declaring does not amount to admitting a conflict. The declaration is what allows IDJÉ to decide with information and to ensure the disclosure in item 07 is accurate.

Anyone with a significant financial interest in, or a link to, the provider whose system is being evaluated is barred from the evaluation team at every stage: defining the method, running collection, analysing results, drafting, reviewing and approving publication.

The bar does not extend to logistical or infrastructure support, provided the activity is supervised by someone with access to the relevant declarations and does not touch the design, the data or the text.

The recusal is recorded in the evaluation file, together with the declaration that gave rise to it.

Every evaluation IDJÉ publishes answers six questions in its own text.

Was IDJÉ paid by the evaluated provider, or by a direct competitor of it, to conduct that evaluation?

Does a meaningful fraction of IDJÉ's funding come from the evaluated provider, its employees, or its direct competitors?

Do the evaluated provider, its employees, or its direct competitors own equity in IDJÉ?

Do the staff who carried out the evaluation own equity in the evaluated provider or in a direct competitor of it?

Do any staff working on the evaluation simultaneously work for the evaluated provider or a direct competitor of it?

Does IDJÉ have any other conflict of interest relevant to that evaluation?

In every published evaluation, a negative answer is stated as negative rather than presented as a question that does not apply. An affirmative answer states the amount, the share of revenue for the period, and the person or organisation involved.

The declarations in item 05, the recusal record in item 06 and the answers in item 07 are kept on file for five years from the publication of the evaluation. None of that set is published on the laboratory's own initiative.

The file is accessible to those who sign this policy, and may be described or reproduced in part when a public question arises, taking care not to expose personal data beyond what is necessary.

The funder portfolio is reviewed once a year, with the links declared by individuals and organisations rechecked.

A conflict that appears later, whether through a change of employment by the donor, the acquisition of the donor company or a donation intermediated by a third party, is disclosed in the next published evaluation, and the affected evaluations receive a correction notice. Disclosing a conflict once discovered is an administrative matter; concealing one ends the public usefulness of the laboratory.

A breach of this policy by a member of the team bars that person from future evaluations and is recorded in the file.

When the breach reaches an already published result, IDJÉ publishes a correction notice stating what was affected and why.

Questions and requests for clarification about this policy are sent to the contact address published on this website. IDJÉ replies in writing and records the reply.