AI Labs · Last updated 7 Jun 2026 · methodology vv2.3 · Hallucination Register

Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Sonnet46

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

Question (paraphrased to protect IP): A head of liquidity risk at a major derivatives CCP wants a briefing covering the PFMI Principle 15 requirements for liquid net assets funded by equity, the minimum level, how it is calculated, and what qualifies, together with what the November 2025 CPMI-IOSCO assessment found about FMI compliance with this standard, and what changes the FIA and ISDA proposed in their response to the associated CPMI-IOSCO consultation.
AI's response: "The six-month operating expense floor is in KC2, which requires LNAFE to cover 'potential general business losses' and sets a minimum of six months of current operating expenses."
Regulator's text: KC3 (Annex A): 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 located the correct quantitative threshold but attributed it to Key Consideration 2 instead of Key Consideration 3. The error is a cross-reference mis-assignment, the model's description of KC2's function ("potential general business losses") is drawn from the correct Key Consideration, but when it located the six-month floor it attached it to the wrong KC number. For a compliance team using this response to draft internal policy, the mis-assignment directs them to review and cite the wrong provision of the PFMI framework, with material consequences for regulatory engagement accuracy. The model also cited a third-party regulatory commentary source as a basis for this section of its response.
Cited source(s):
https://www.regulationtomorrow.com/2025/11/cpmi-iosco-papers-on-management-of..., Pretextual

Impact for this audience

This failure implicates the model's cross-reference resolution within the PFMI Principle 15 Key Consideration list: the correct threshold was located but attributed to KC2 instead of KC3. The subsystem gap is structured-document KC-number-to-provision linkage in training data — the model's Annex A representation does not reliably bind specific quantitative requirements to their correct KC identifier. The Pretextual citation (third-party commentary) used as a sourcing basis for this section of the response compounds the error.

References — raw findings (per AI model)

RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Opus47 Claude Opus 4.7 (web search on)
RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Sonnet46 Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on)

This finding also affects

← Previous finding Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON Next finding → Finding on 'Q005 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-Sonnet46

Plain text Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Sonnet46. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-07. 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--sonnet-46-websearch/

APA 7th edition Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Sonnet46]. 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--sonnet-46-websearch/

Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-L3-GENERAL-BUSINESS-RISK-2025-Q003-Sonnet46], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 07, 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--sonnet-46-websearch/.

BibTeX Download

@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_PFMI_L3_GENERAL_BUSINESS_RISK_2025_Q003_Sonnet46,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q003 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 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-Sonnet46},
  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--sonnet-46-websearch/}
}

← Back to case study summary Case study detail →

About Citation IDs →

Every finding on this page compares an AI subject's account of the rule against the regulator's verbatim text from the regulator's own portal. Both are linked. Each delta, its root causes, and impact analysis are documented and published with immutable Citation IDs.