Choose an institution to see its records and dossier, or choose a topic.
Through year 2027 · all records, including scheduled dates 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2008 2005 1965 Show Organisations and infrastructure All types Organisation Person Document Concept Infrastructure Public body Reset filters
94 people, organisations and other records · 122 relationships · 34 claims about a valueEverything recorded up to the chosen year, whether or not still in effect · Undated records included
Claim and evidence Close ×
Microsoft FGF · Feb 2026 states a provision on the comparison question “Provisions conditioned on other developers”, in a weaker form than the question’s criterion. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Provision Exception · provision ID comparison-d6-competitor Subject version Feb 2026 · Publication date unknown · Effective date not established · Revised 2026-02 Date 2026-02 · revision Scope and limits Stated, partly: the passage has what the question’s criterion asks for, but in a weaker form than the criterion’s own words. A marginal-uplift consideration in the risk determination, measured against available tools and open-weights models; it does not state that measures change depending on other developers’ actions. What the edition states, quoted from the cited expression. It is not evidence of implementation, compliance or effectiveness, and a shared question does not make two editions’ provisions equivalent.
The evidence 01 primary source Supports the claim
Frontier Governance Framework — February 2026 ↗ Microsoft · Publication date unknown
Archived copy, captured 2026-04-24: Frontier Governance Framework — February 2026 ↗
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “considers the marginal capability uplift … including currently available open-weights models.” Location in source PDF p. 7 (printed p. 6), §3, Deeper capability assessment, 'Holistic risk assessment' bullet, final sentence
Machine-checked · 2026-10-27
Source details and check notes Authors Microsoft Version Frontier Governance Framework, February 2026 edition (change log entry dated February 2026). The file served at the recorded address (last modified 2026-03-24) is byte-identical to the Internet Archive capture of 2026-04-24, the earliest located; a separate publication date was not established. Version date 2026-02 Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-03 Language English (en) Archive copy Open archived copy, captured 2026-04-24: Frontier Governance Framework — February 2026 ↗ . An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2026-04-24. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-10-03.Attribution Microsoft, Frontier Governance Framework (February 2026). Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Selekoa practice: metadata, attributed paraphrases and short attributed quotations under the editorial policy (at most 50 words each; at most 400 quoted words per document across the dataset, and about 10% of a document under about 2,000 words). Documents are linked externally, not redistributed. Publisher terms that forbid quotation override this practice. Check notes Verbatim excerpt checked by an automated research assistant on 2026-10-27 against the publisher copy, whose SHA-256 matches the copy retrieved on 2026-10-15. In this edition the holistic risk assessment, of which this is part, 'may also inform' the determination of a model's risk level; the February 2025 edition says such results 'then inform' it. Human editorial review is pending. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. An exact framework edition states one provision: a capability threshold or risk level and its trigger, a required safeguard or action, a decision authority (who decides, recommends, can overrule or is informed), or a stated exception. The quoted text records what the edition says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.
Date. Comparison cell for this edition, dated by the edition’s revision date.
Record ID cmp-ms-fgf-2026-d6-competitor