AI Labs · updated 2026-05-29 · methodology v2.1

Finding on 'Q009 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q009-Opus47

What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q009 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON

Question (paraphrased to protect IP): What are the compliance assessment rating levels used in the CPMI-IOSCO PFMI assessment methodology, and how do they compare to the Basel Core Principles compliance scale?
AI's response: "The CPMI-IOSCO d106 assessment methodology uses a 5-category observance scale for individual FMI assessments: Observed, Broadly Observed, Partly Observed, Not Observed, and Not Applicable."
Regulator's text: [Not accessible — PDF binary. Recalled scale: 'observed / broadly observed / partly observed / not observed']
Why the AI went wrong: The model reconstructed the assessment methodology rating scale from training data rather than from live document access, and in doing so added a fifth category ("Not Applicable") that does not appear in the regulator's published text. The response also cited a specific IOSCO publication URL as the authority for this characterisation, but the URL does not correspond to the CPMI-IOSCO assessment methodology document for PFMI. The error is a small but consequential misrepresentation of a formal compliance framework.
Cited source(s):
https://www.iosco.org/library/pubdocs/pdf/IOSCOPD396.pdf — Pretextual

Impact for this audience

The model added a category ('Not Applicable') to a four-category compliance rating scale that does not appear in the regulator's text — a small but materially consequential error for any user building a compliance assessment framework. This points to a training-data gap in the assessment methodology document specifically, which is less widely cited than the core PFMI and may be underrepresented in training corpora.

← Previous finding Finding on 'Q005 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON Next finding → Finding on 'Q011 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 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-2012-Q009-Opus47

Plain text Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q009 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q009-Opus47. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-29. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-2012/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-v1-009--opus-47-websearch/

APA 7th edition Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q009 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q009-Opus47]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-2012/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-v1-009--opus-47-websearch/

Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download

RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q009 Probe' for Claude Opus 4.7 with web search ON [RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q009-Opus47], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 29, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-2012/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-v1-009--opus-47-websearch/.

BibTeX Download

@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_PFMI_2012_Q009_Opus47,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q009 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-2012-Q009-Opus47},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-pfmi-2012/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-v1-009--opus-47-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.