AI Hallucination Research › Regulators › Global standard-setters › INT › BIS-CPMI › CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012 › White paper › Detail › Finding
AI Labs · published 2026-05-29 · methodology v2.1

Claude Opus 4.7 with web search

RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q012-Opus47
What the RLB Specialist Panel found
  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Do the PFMI principles apply to central bank-operated payment systems, and what guidance governs this application?
  • AI's response: "PFMI applies to all systemically important payment systems regardless of operator — including central-bank-operated systems such as Fedwire, TARGET2/T2, and CHAPS. The PFMI itself (§1.20 and §1.21) states that the principles apply to systemically important FMIs operated by central banks"
  • Regulator's text: [Not accessible — 3-page PDF binary. Landing page: 'clarify the interaction between the PFMI and central bank policies.']
  • Why the AI went wrong: The model correctly identified the general principle that PFMI applies to central bank-operated systems, but then fabricated specific paragraph references (§1.20 and §1.21) that cannot be verified against the inaccessible primary PDF, and named specific central bank systems as illustrative examples in a manner that implies they are explicitly cited in the document. The cited URL maps to the PFMI landing page PDF rather than to any document that contains these specific paragraph references.
  • Cited source(s):
  • https://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d101a.pdf — Pretextual
Impact for this audience

The model fabricated specific paragraph references (§1.20 and §1.21) that cannot be verified, presenting them with the same confidence as correctly recalled general principles. Paragraph-level citation hallucination is a known failure mode that is difficult to catch in standard capability evals — this finding supports the case for verbatim-paragraph probes on the PFMI primary document.

← Previous finding Finding 3. Claude Opus 4.7 with web search Next finding → Finding 5. Claude Opus 4.7 with web search
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). "Claude Opus 4.7 with web search — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q012-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-v1-012--opus-47-websearch/
APA 7th edition 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Claude Opus 4.7 with web search [Hallucination finding RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q012-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-v1-012--opus-47-websearch/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Claude Opus 4.7 with web search [RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q012-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-v1-012--opus-47-websearch/.
BibTeX 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_PFMI_2012_Q012_Opus47,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Claude Opus 4.7 with web search},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-PFMI-2012-Q012-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-v1-012--opus-47-websearch/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →