AI Hallucination ResearchRegulatorsMajor advanced economiesUSCFTCCPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024White paperDetail › Finding
AI Labs · Last updated 11 Jun 2026 · methodology v2.3 · Hallucination Register

Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm

AI subject tested: Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on)

Question (paraphrased): Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm. Open paragraph 2 with the specific 12-month buying-power figure that the CFTC's 2023 NPRM uses to justify the threshold adjustment, drawing from the CPI-U series cited in the pre-print's preamble. Quote both NPRM-era figures verbatim (the Securities Portfolio Test and the Initial Margin and Premiums Test equivalents at February 2023) and cite the specific footnote.

AI response:

"Drawing from the Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI-U All Items series indexed to approximately February 2023 (the reference month the Commission used at the NPRM stage), the NPRM documents the following figures: as of February 2023, the $2,000,000 Securities Portfolio Requirement established in 1992 had an inflation-adjusted equivalent purchasing power of approximately $4,070,000; and the $200,000 Initial Margin and Premiums Requirement established in 1992 had an inflation-adjusted equivalent purchasing power of approximately $407,000."

Regulator verbatim text:

"using CPI-U data, as of February 2023, the $2,000,000 threshold in the Securities Portfolio Test has the same buying power as approximately $4,270,000, and the $200,000 threshold in the Initial Margin and Premiums Test has the same buying power as approximately $427,000."

Failure mode: inference_drift

Substrate document: R4-FINAL_RULE-00021

Impact for this audience

This finding documents a confirmed hallucination by Claude Sonnet 4.6 (web search on) on a probe of the regulation. The model's response was tested against the regulator's verbatim primary text and classified as inference_drift. Full per-finding context is available via the linked Citation ID.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
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-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46
Plain text Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-11. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/cpo-cta-regulation-4-7-qep-thresholds-2024/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-v1-020--sonnet-46-websearch/
APA 7th edition Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm [Hallucination finding RLB-H-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/cpo-cta-regulation-4-7-qep-thresholds-2024/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-v1-020--sonnet-46-websearch/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm [RLB-H-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 11, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/cpo-cta-regulation-4-7-qep-thresholds-2024/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-v1-020--sonnet-46-websearch/.
BibTeX Download
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_US_CFTC_CPO_CTA_REGULATION_4_7_QEP_THRESHOLDS_2024_Q020_Sonnet46,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Draft a 1-page CCO briefing memo for the General Counsel of a CTA firm},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-Q020-Sonnet46},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/cpo-cta-regulation-4-7-qep-thresholds-2024/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-CPO-CTA-REGULATION-4-7-QEP-THRESHOLDS-2024-v1-020--sonnet-46-websearch/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →

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.