AI Hallucination ResearchRegulatorsMajor advanced economiesUSCFTCFCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44White paperDetail › Finding
AI Labs · updated 2026-06-06 · methodology v2.1

Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): A compliance team asked an AI to draft a checklist memo covering all regulatory triggers that require an FCM to immediately cease separate account treatment under Regulation 1.44, organized so operations staff could build automated monitoring. The AI listed four customer-level triggers — disaggregating margin failure into three separate checkboxes (initial margin, maintenance margin, and variation margin/option premium) and adding event of default — plus three FCM-level triggers, for seven items total. The regulation enumerates six customer-specific cessation events: failure to meet margin call deadlines, FCM declaration of default, CCO determination of customer financial distress, customer insolvency or bankruptcy, regulatory notification of customer financial distress allegations, and a regulator directive to cease separate account treatment. An operations team using the AI's checklist as the basis for automated monitoring would have no alerts for four of the six customer-specific triggers. When re-probed, the AI self-retracted.
  • AI's response: "CATEGORY A — CUSTOMER-LEVEL TRIGGERS: Checkbox 1: Margin Failure — Initial Margin... Checkbox 2: Margin Failure — Maintenance Margin... Checkbox 3: Margin Failure — Variation Margin or Option Premium... Checkbox 4: Event of Default."
  • Regulator's text: Six customer-specific cessation events including: failure to meet margin call deadlines, FCM declaration of default, CCO determination of customer financial distress, customer insolvency or bankruptcy, regulatory notification of customer financial distress allegations, and a regulator directive to cease separate account treatment.
  • Why the AI went wrong: The model disaggregated a single cessation trigger (margin call failure) into three margin-type sub-checkboxes, consuming checklist slots that should have been populated by distinct regulatory events. The output maps margin-operations intuition — tracking initial, maintenance, and variation margin separately is common in treasury systems — onto a regulatory enumeration where these are a single trigger. Four of the six customer-specific cessation events in the regulation (CCO distress determination, regulatory notification, insolvency, and the regulator directive) did not appear. The self-retraction on re-probe again points to the correct content being reachable but not produced on the first generation pass.
  • Cited source(s):
Impact for this audience

The model's disaggregation of a single cessation trigger into three margin-type sub-checkboxes points to a generation-layer prior about how compliance checklists are structured in treasury systems — a prior strong enough to override the regulation's closed enumeration even when the regulation was likely retrievable. The self-retraction on re-probe again indicates the correct enumeration was accessible.

The implication for the post-training logic layer is specific: the model lacks a reliable signal for 'regulatory enumeration is closed — do not infer additional items or disaggregate existing items from operational intuition.' That signal needs to be stronger than the treasury-systems prior when the task context is regulatory compliance.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
This finding also affects
← Previous finding Finding on 'Q001 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 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-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46
Plain text Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-06. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/fcm-margin-adequacy-separate-accounts-reg-1-44/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-v1-002--sonnet-46-websearch/
APA 7th edition Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/fcm-margin-adequacy-separate-accounts-reg-1-44/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-v1-002--sonnet-46-websearch/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [RLB-H-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 06, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/fcm-margin-adequacy-separate-accounts-reg-1-44/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-v1-002--sonnet-46-websearch/.
BibTeX Download
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_US_CFTC_FCM_MARGIN_ADEQUACY_SEPARATE_ACCOUNTS_REG_1_44_Q002_Sonnet46,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q002 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-US-CFTC-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-Q002-Sonnet46},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/us/cftc/fcm-margin-adequacy-separate-accounts-reg-1-44/whitepaper/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-FCM-MARGIN-ADEQUACY-SEPARATE-ACCOUNTS-REG-1-44-v1-002--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.