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-Q014-Opus47
What the RLB Specialist Panel found
  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Is the 2017 CPMI-IOSCO CCP resilience guidance still the current operative standard, or has it been supplemented since 2017?
  • AI's response: "the May 2026 consultative updates on initial margin (CPMI-IOSCO consultation on updated guidance and public disclosures to implement initial margin proposals — published May 2026), which proposes additional guidance on margin practices building on d163."
  • Regulator's text: A May 2026 CPMI-IOSCO consultation on updated guidance addresses simulation tools, initial margin responsiveness, margin model governance, overrides, and public disclosures. Comment deadline: 30 June 2026.
  • Why the AI went wrong: The model correctly identified that a May 2026 consultative document exists and broadly characterised its subject matter, but the accompanying citation resolves to a BIS press release page that does not correspond to the document described, and the model's characterisation of the document's scope omits several of the specific areas the consultation actually covers. The response presents the content claim with the same confidence as the citation, giving no indication that the document's precise scope was reconstructed rather than retrieved.
  • Cited source(s):
  • https://www.bis.org/press/p260506.htm — Pretextual
Impact for this audience

The model correctly identified a May 2026 consultative document but produced a scope characterisation that omits material areas of the consultation. The citation (a BIS press release) does not confirm the claimed scope. This is a partial-knowledge failure — the model knows the document exists but cannot accurately characterise its content, and the retrieval step does not correct the gap.

← Previous finding Finding 4. Claude Opus 4.7 with web search Next finding → Finding 6. 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-Q014-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-v1-014--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-Q014-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-v1-014--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-Q014-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-v1-014--opus-47-websearch/.
BibTeX 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_PFMI_2012_Q014_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-Q014-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-v1-014--opus-47-websearch/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →