AI Hallucination Research › Audiences › Sectors › Singapore › Retail Banking › Compliance › Detail › Finding
Retail Banking × Compliance — Singapore · published 2026-05-28 · methodology v2.1

Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

3. Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions

  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): What does Annex 4D of the consolidated MAS Notice 637 cover, and what category of items does it explicitly exclude from its scope?
  • Source regulation: MAS Notice 637 (Risk Based Capital Adequacy Requirements for Banks) — Monetary Authority of Singapore (Regulator portal: https://www.mas.gov.sg)
  • What AI assistants typically say: AI tools characterised Annex 4D as covering credit conversion factors for off-balance sheet items within the leverage ratio framework, while simultaneously acknowledging in a caveat that other sources pointed toward the Standardised Approach credit risk framework instead. The AI's primary answer and its own hedge directly contradicted each other.
  • What the regulator actually says: No regulator excerpt was available for direct quotation in this finding; the actual scope and exclusions of Annex 4D should be verified by reference to the consolidated MAS Notice 637 text available via the MAS regulatory portal.
  • Why the AI went wrong: The AI assigned Annex 4D to the leverage ratio framework based on reasoning about off-balance sheet credit conversion factors, but the annex numbering convention (Part IV prefix) points toward the Standardised Approach credit risk section instead. The AI's own caveat acknowledged this conflict rather than resolving it, yet still led with the likely-incorrect characterisation — a self-contradictory response that a reader relying on the headline answer would misunderstand.
  • Cited source(s):
Impact for this audience

A Compliance or risk team consulting Annex 4D in the course of calculating risk-weighted assets or leverage ratio exposures would apply the wrong methodology if the AI's framework attribution is incorrect. Misassigning off-balance sheet items to the leverage ratio framework instead of the Standardised Approach credit risk framework — or vice versa — would produce incorrect capital calculations across the affected portfolio. Given that capital ratio calculations feed directly into the firm's regulatory capital reporting to MAS, an error of this kind carries both a misreporting risk and the potential for capital buffers to be understated, with consequences for MAS's assessment of the firm's capital adequacy.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
This finding also affects
← Previous finding Finding 2. Mischaracterisation of yellow highlighting in MAS Notice 637 amendment PDFs Next finding → Finding 4. Unverified content attribution for Annex 6C
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.

Plain text 
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions — Retail Banking × Compliance — Singapore." Citation ID: . RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-28. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/sg/retail_banking/compliance/finding/q-NOTICE-637-CAPITAL-ADEQUACY-BANKS-2025-v1-017/
APA 7th edition 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions [Hallucination finding ]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/sg/retail_banking/compliance/finding/q-NOTICE-637-CAPITAL-ADEQUACY-BANKS-2025-v1-017/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions [], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 28, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/sg/retail_banking/compliance/finding/q-NOTICE-637-CAPITAL-ADEQUACY-BANKS-2025-v1-017/.
BibTeX 
@misc{reglegbrief_,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Incorrect framework attribution for Annex 4D scope and exclusions},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: },
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/audiences/sectors/sg/retail_banking/compliance/finding/q-NOTICE-637-CAPITAL-ADEQUACY-BANKS-2025-v1-017/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →