Consulting firm KPMG has removed the report “Rethinking Excellence in the Age of Agent AI” from its websites following complaints from organizations about inaccurate or misleading claims regarding their use of the technology, according to FT.
The document was published in October 2025. It claimed that several major organizations were already using AI agents to automate complex business processes, including investment consulting, risk management, transportation logistics, and healthcare.
UBS and Transport Companies Deny Claims
One of the most notable examples was UBS. The report claimed that the bank had integrated AI assistants into investment consulting, risk control, and compliance on a platform developed jointly with Microsoft.
A UBS representative told the publication that these claims were “factually incorrect.” Following the bank’s complaint, KPMG began removing the document from its resources.
Similar complaints arose from Swiss Federal Railways. The report stated that the railway operator used AI agents for planning and optimizing trips based on passenger preferences and environmental factors. The company stated that such descriptions were inaccurate.
Representatives from Transport for London also called KPMG’s claims about using agent AI for managing transport congestion and coordinating services misleading.
GPTZero Identifies Signs of AI Hallucinations
The inaccuracies were identified by the research group GPTZero, which specializes in analyzing AI-generated content. According to experts, many disputed sections resemble classic hallucinations of language models—instances where the system generates convincingly presented but inaccurate information.
Particular attention was drawn to the case of the Greater Manchester National Health Service. KPMG claimed that the organization used agent AI to predict readmissions and route patients. However, the source cited in the report only described the use of the technology in a project for early lung cancer detection and did not contain such claims.
Issue Affects Entire Consulting Sector
KPMG stated that it takes the accuracy of published materials seriously and is conducting an internal investigation into the circumstances of the errors. The company emphasized that its policy requires mandatory human review and verification from independent sources.
The incident is another example of problems associated with the use of generative AI in professional services. In May, EY was also forced to withdraw a similar report after discovering fictitious references and other errors. Previously, law firm Sullivan & Cromwell reported inaccuracies caused by AI use.
Risks to the Research Market
GPTZero CEO Edward Tian warned that errors in reports from major consulting firms could create a “secondary hallucination” effect, where inaccurate information begins to spread through media, analytical reviews, and research by other organizations.
According to GPTZero, the conclusions of KPMG’s disputed report have already been cited by industry publications and major international media. Experts note that such cases undermine trust in analytical materials from companies that simultaneously advise clients on AI implementation and related risk management.
In June, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei urged US authorities to tighten regulations on artificial intelligence.
