Skip to content

Getting support

Where to ask

Channel Use for
MLPerf Endpoints working group Joining the group — the primary route for rule questions and proposals
endpoints@mlcommons.org General questions about the benchmark and submitting
mlcommons/endpoints_policies issues Rule ambiguities, errors in the rules, v1.0 proposals
mlcommons/endpoints-submission-cli issues Bugs in the submission CLI or checker
mlcommons/endpoints issues Bugs in the reference benchmark client
Your submission's review thread Anything about a submission already in review

No response times are published

None of the sources state a support SLA, or a turnaround for PRISM API-creation access. Build slack into your plan rather than assuming same-day answers.

What to include when asking

A question with these attached gets answered once instead of three times:

  • Which division and scenario you are submitting under
  • Versions — the endpoints commit SHA you built from, and endpoints-submission-cli --version
  • The exact error text, not a paraphrase
  • The checker output — submission-checker check … --output checker.json
  • The relevant point.yaml with secrets removed
  • What you expected, and what the rules clause you are reading says

For a run problem, report.txt and the non-histogram fields of result_summary.json are usually enough. Don't attach events.jsonl, which runs to hundreds of megabytes.

Never paste your PRISM token

Not in an issue, not in a log, not in a config attachment. If you think one has leaked, rotate it from the API Keys dashboard immediately. It can be used to withdraw your submissions.

Questions this documentation cannot answer

Some things are genuinely not published anywhere. If your question is one of these, go straight to MLCommons rather than searching further:

  • Whether your organisation needs MLCommons membership to submit
  • The PRISM and Member Central URLs
  • Which seed set a v1.0 submission should bind
  • The v1.0 supported model list, accuracy targets, and dataset paths
  • CoN client locations and scheduling
  • The Preview Availability Tracker and public results URLs

Full list with context: Open questions.

During review

Objections are filed and resolved on the submission's review thread, not through support channels. Meetings are convened only when an objection escalates, a party explicitly requests one with a written agenda and specific questions, or the review chair decides a meeting would materially accelerate resolution.

If you think a reviewer has a conflict of interest, raise it with the review chair. You can do this at any time during review, and the chair decides whether they should step aside.

If you believe a published result involves fraud or misrepresentation, that is a separate route: any MLCommons member may raise it by email to any MLCommons working-group chair. It carries no time limit. Concerns that do not allege fraud are handled as late objections or audit nominations instead.

Reporting a documentation problem

This site is a guided path over the authoritative sources, and it can be wrong in ways the sources are not.

  • If this site contradicts the policy repository, the policy repository is correct and this site has a bug. Please report it.
  • If a page is out of date, check its Last verified against: line. Pages are verified against a specific commit, and the upstream rules are a live development branch.
  • If something was hard to find, that is also a bug worth reporting. A question that keeps being asked means a page failed to answer it.