What does Section VIII.c of the 2025 OECD Merger Review Recommendation require of the Competition Committee regarding Council reporting, including the specific timeline and whether the reporting structure involves a single uniform interval or multiple distinct intervals?
Section VIII.c establishes a two-stage interval structure: an initial report within five years of the 2025 revision, then reports at minimum every ten years thereafter. The model collapsed this into a uniform five-year cycle, applying the initial, tighter interval as the recurring interval, and then arithmetically projected specific report years (2030, 2035) that appear nowhere in the text. The error erases a meaningful structural distinction: the first interval is an expedited post-revision check; the recurring interval is a longer-cadence review.
The model produced a response with the format of a precise, text-grounded answer while substituting a simpler reconstruction for the actual two-interval structure.
The collapse of a two-stage interval into a uniform five-year cycle, combined with arithmetic projection of specific years not in the text, is a numeric-precision failure: the model applied the initial interval as the recurring interval and extended it without flagging that the text specifies a different cadence for subsequent reports. The training-data representation of Section VIII.c's two-interval structure appears absent or insufficient, causing the model to reconstruct from the simpler single-interval convention. The self-generated year projections compound the error by adding specificity that has no textual basis.
Section VIII.c establishes a two-tier reporting structure: an initial report within five years of the 2025 revision (by 2030), then at least every ten years thereafter (from 2040). AI tools collapsed this into a single recurring five-year cycle, projecting 2035 as the second report, understating the subsequent interval by half. For a lawyer advising on compliance calendaring or preparing a client brief on the OECD's review process, the error produces a wrong deliverable on a technical but verifiable point, one that an authority or regulatory affairs counterpart would catch immediately.
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.
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding#3, Two-tier reporting interval collapsed to single 5-year cycle [RLB-F-INT-OECD-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-Q004], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 11, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/OECD/OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025/practitioners/lawyers/finding/INT-OECD-INT-001-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-v1-004/.
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding#3, Two-tier reporting interval collapsed to single 5-year cycle — Practitioners — Lawyers." Citation ID: RLB-F-INT-OECD-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-Q004. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-11. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/OECD/OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025/practitioners/lawyers/finding/INT-OECD-INT-001-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-v1-004/
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding#3, Two-tier reporting interval collapsed to single 5-year cycle [Hallucination finding RLB-F-INT-OECD-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-Q004]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/OECD/OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025/practitioners/lawyers/finding/INT-OECD-INT-001-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-v1-004/
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_F_INT_OECD_OECD_MERGER_REVIEW_RECOMMENDATION_2025_Q004,
author = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
title = {Finding#3, Two-tier reporting interval collapsed to single 5-year cycle},
year = {2026},
publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
note = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-F-INT-OECD-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-Q004},
url = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/OECD/OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025/practitioners/lawyers/finding/INT-OECD-INT-001-OECD-MERGER-REVIEW-RECOMMENDATION-2025-v1-004/}
}
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.