AI Hallucination Research › Regulators › Global standard-setters › INT › BIS-CPMI › CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025 › White paper › Detail › Finding
AI Labs · updated 2026-06-03 · methodology v2.1

Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): What is the minimum liquid net assets funded by equity (LNAFE) that PFMI Principle 15 Key Consideration 3 requires an FMI to hold, and how exactly is that minimum structured and calculated under the rule text?
  • AI's response: "requires an FMI to hold liquid net assets funded by equity (LNAFE) equal to at least the GREATER OF (i) the amount needed to cover potential general business losses derived from the FMI's own scenario analysis, and (ii) six months of current operating expenses"
  • Regulator's text: At a minimum, an FMI should hold liquid net assets funded by equity equal to at least six months of current operating expenses.
  • Why the AI went wrong: The model constructed a "greater of" compound minimum that does not exist in the published standard. The regulator's text for Key Consideration 3 states a single flat floor — six months of current operating expenses — without any scenario-analysis-derived comparator. The scenario-analysis component the model introduced may reflect concepts from adjacent Key Considerations within the same Principle, but the model merged them into a single formulation and attributed the compound structure specifically to Key Consideration 3. An FMI compliance team relying on this response would overstate the regulatory minimum in a way that mischaracterises the rule's actual structure.
  • Cited source(s):
Impact for this audience

This failure implicates training-data anchoring on PFMI Principle 15 KC3's quantitative minimum: the model generated a 'greater of' compound floor where the regulator's published text states a single flat floor. The compound structure may have been synthesised from scenario-analysis language in adjacent Key Considerations. The subsystem gap is single-floor vs. compound-floor discrimination — the model's generalised schema for regulatory capital minimums produced a more complex formulation than the rule requires, expressed with high apparent confidence.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
This finding also affects
← Previous finding Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON Next finding → Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON
Cite this finding

Each finding has a stable Citation ID (RLB-F-… for aggregated case-study findings, RLB-H-… for raw per-model hallucinations) — like a DOI, the ID always resolves to the canonical finding even if URLs change.

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47
Plain text Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-03. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-l3-general-business-risk-2025/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-v1-003--opus-47-websearch/
APA 7th edition Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-l3-general-business-risk-2025/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-v1-003--opus-47-websearch/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 03, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-l3-general-business-risk-2025/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-v1-003--opus-47-websearch/.
BibTeX Download 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_PFMI_L3_GENERAL_BUSINESS_RISK_2025_Q003_Opus47,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-l3-general-business-risk-2025/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-v1-003--opus-47-websearch/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →