Providers of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk must document adversarial testing and any involvement of independent external evaluators under Article 55 of the AI Act. Population-scale synthetic-persona simulation infrastructure is a plausible candidate for that role — external to the model provider, but not independent of itself when its own population and validation figures are self-reported. No such case has been identified; this article examines the structural gap that would arise if one did.

OpenAI's Astra disclosure raises a Critical-level cybersecurity flag on the basis of an evaluation record only OpenAI has seen. This article examines what would, and would not, make that determination independently verifiable.

The Payment Services Regulation (PSR) now imposes an affirmative obligation on the provider: invite the payer to respond before concluding fraud or gross negligence. This obligation shifts the evidentiary initiative, but sets no evidentiary regime for proving its own implementation. An analysis of the gap and the SOURCE 0 pre-execution attestation response.

Le règlement sur les services de paiement (PSR) impose désormais au prestataire une obligation positive : inviter le payeur à s'exprimer avant de conclure à la fraude ou à la négligence grave. Cette obligation déplace l'initiative probatoire, mais ne fixe aucun régime de preuve de sa propre mise en œuvre. Analyse de la lacune et de la réponse d'attestation pré-exécution SOURCE 0.