Funding Sources

Transparency in funding is essential to maintaining public trust in our evaluations. The table below discloses all funding sources that support MAST development and operations.

Conflict of Interest Policy

ARISE maintains strict conflict of interest policies to protect the integrity of MAST evaluations. The following rules apply to all team members, advisors, and collaborators involved in the benchmark process:

• AI companies cannot fund or sponsor specific benchmark evaluations or influence evaluation scheduling.
• Team members with financial affiliations to any evaluated AI company must recuse themselves from scoring that company's submissions.
• All advisory board members must disclose potential conflicts of interest, which are reviewed annually and published on our website.
• Evaluation rubrics and scoring criteria are locked before any model submission is evaluated and cannot be modified retroactively.
• External audit of our evaluation process is conducted annually by an independent academic review committee.

Data Use Policy

During evaluation, model providers submit their systems through our controlled API pipeline. MAST does not share benchmark cases with model providers before or after evaluation. All evaluation data is processed in a secure environment, and model outputs are stored only for the duration needed to complete scoring.

De-identified clinical cases used in the benchmark are sourced from existing institutional research datasets with appropriate IRB approvals. No patient-identifiable information is included in any benchmark case. Model providers' API keys and system configurations are handled under standard data protection protocols and are not retained after evaluation completion.

Contact

For questions about our transparency practices, funding disclosures, or conflict of interest policies, please reach out to our transparency team.