1filers, current period
0the period before
3controls it touches
3frameworks
The long view
Filings containing this phrase, every month since 2008. The last
point is the current month and is still filling, so it always looks lower than it will be.
2008
peak 30 in October 2014
2026
Who disclosed it
From SEC full-text search over 8-K filings. Every row links to the filing itself.
| Company | Form | Filed | |
|---|
| VALLEY NATIONAL BANCORP | 8-K | 2026-07-23 | filing |
The full search on EDGAR
How it actually arrives
An 8-K's meaning is in its item number, not its text. These are the items the filings
containing this phrase were filed under. The first group is something that happened to the
company. The second is the phrase turning up in the ordinary course of reporting, most often in
an earnings release, which is a very different thing and is usually the larger number.
| Filed because something happened |
Companies |
|---|
| Other material event Item 8.01 | 1 |
| Mentioned in routine reporting |
Companies |
|---|
| Financial statements and exhibits Item 9.01 | 10 |
| Regulation FD disclosure Item 7.01 | 7 |
| Results of operations, the earnings release Item 2.02 | 5 |
This is why a headline count on its own overstates the case.
Where the routine number dominates, the phrase is being tracked as language rather than as
events.
Which industries file it
Companies grouped by the industry classification on their own filing. A count, not a
survey.
| Industry | | Companies |
|---|
| Banking | | 7 |
| Securities and investment | | 2 |
| Insurance | | 1 |
What it obligates
Our corpus holds 3 controls across
3 frameworks whose text speaks to this. Not a judgement:
these controls say so, and each is one lookup from its source document. Ordered by how much each
framework has to say about it, so the one that will cost you the most work is first. Every name
opens that framework in the corpus.
What an auditor will ask you to produce
The artefacts named on those controls, most frequently cited first.
- Performance monitoring + per subgroup + records + per model + per quarter
- Drift detection + threshold + records + per model + continuous + alerting
- Retraining triggers + documented + records + per trigger + activation
- Safe update + re-validation + records + per release + Model Card version
- frontier model identification + capability assessment + risk disclosure
- responsible scaling policy + dangerous capability evaluation
- independent evaluation participation (AISI + third-party + red team)
- alignment with international frontier commitments
How it usually fails
Recorded when each control was verified against its source. This is where programmes
that think they are covered turn out not to be.
- Performance monitoring aggregate only (no subgroup)
- Drift detection threshold absent (drift unnoticed)
- Retraining ad-hoc (no documented triggers)
- Updates skipped re-validation (silent regression)
- frontier model not identified despite meeting capability/compute thresholds
- no responsible scaling policy
Where this comes from
The left half is public record: SEC full-text search over 8-K filings, counted across a
7 day window against the equivalent window before it. You can check
every row.
The right half is ours: 723 frameworks and
20,473 controls, 531 of those frameworks verified against
their source documents, with the auditor evidence and common failure modes recorded control by
control. Controls appear here because their own text names this term.
Today's edition ·
How programmes fail ·
The obligation index