SecureBio, 2026; retrieved 2026-09-15 tier 3 self (securebio)confirmed

SecureBio's principles and practices for model assessment

Adopts AEF-1; requests funding to cover costs for some for-profit engagements and discloses it per report; developers have no authority to redact unfavorable findings; reports shared with developers in advance for confidential-business-information redaction; holdout sets. Fetched 2026-09-15; spans present.

Signals citing this source

SecureBio, F (against): Labs typically pay for evaluations of their own models; OpenAI covered the cost of the GPT-5.5 assessment.
SecureBio, G (for): Founding member of the AI Evaluator Forum, which wrote the AEF-1 independence standard.“As members of the AI Evaluator Forum (AEF), we co-developed and have adopted the AEF-1 Standard”
SecureBio, G (for): SecureBio publishes a conflicts-of-interest policy requiring recusal for financial interests or recent employment at the assessed entity and barring results-contingent funding.
SecureBio, R (for): SecureBio's principles state developers have no authority to redact results to conceal unfavorable findings, that redactions are limited to infohazards and confidential business information, and that reports say whether redactions affect conclusions.“AI developers have no authority to redact our results to conceal performance or unfavorable findings”
SecureBio, P (for): SecureBio's COI policy makes disclosure of conflicts mandatory for all AI-team staff at hiring and every six months, requires recusal, and its reports disclose conflicts relevant to each assessment.

Ledger rows citing this URL

none