GuShiio.com ① In the AI model competition, DeepSeek and Doubao’s reasoning abilities were extensively tested. Faced with many anonymous IPO violations published by the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Beijing Stock Exchange, the two have their own “solving capabilities”;
② Although there are many successful examples of “solving crimes” in the large model, the market is waiting to see whether it can develop more practical value in the future.
Cailian News, February 7 (Reporter Zhao Xinrui)In the fierce competition for the AI model, DeepSeek strongly “breaks the circle” with its strong reasoning capabilities. Its performance in the AI field is even comparable to OpenAI’s o1 model, and it has become the focus of heated discussion in the market for a time. At the same time, the big model of bean buns has also attracted much attention, and many users compare the two together.
As we all know, exchanges routinely publish IPO violations anonymously, and the market is often full of curiosity about which company it is. The industry often makes judgments based on limited information. Nowadays, with AI tools, it is obvious that “solving crimes” has added a powerful tool.
Recently, the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Beijing Stock Exchange have successively released the latest listing review updates, including many anonymously notified IPO violations. In order to find out, the reporter launched a “challenge” to DeepSeek and Doubao respectively, asking questions about these cases and trying to test their ability to “solve cases”.
DeepSeek successfully solved the case together
Looking at the situation of the Shanghai Stock Exchange first, the Shanghai Stock Exchange disclosed a total of 3 anonymous cases in the review of the first phase of issuance and listing in 2025.
The key sentence of one case is: “The issuer, Company B, is a company applying for the Science and Technology Innovation Board, and the experimental materials used in field experiments account for a relatively high proportion of R & D investment.” DeepSeek successfully “cracked” this case.
The Shanghai Stock Exchange notice mentioned that issuer Company B is a company applying for the Science and Technology Innovation Board, and the experimental materials used in field experiments account for a relatively high proportion of R & D investment. There are field experiments in both the R & D and sales links of Company B. Company B did not fully explain the differences between the two types of field experiments, R & D and sales, and did not formulate a specific field test process management process. The field test process and results could not be verified, and relevant internal controls were imperfect. The recommendation institution and reporting accountant did not pay full attention to and prudently check the internal controls related to the issuer’s R & D investment and the sales personnel’s capital flow, and did not perform relevant duties properly.
The reporter asked DeepSeek accordingly, and DeepSeek analyzed that the anonymous company was Syngenta, which was jointly sponsored by China International Capital Corporation and BOC International Securities.
The Shanghai Stock Exchange also reported two other cases. One was that basic accounting work and financial internal control work were not standardized, and relevant matters were not disclosed adequately and accurately.
The case mentioned that on-site supervision found that issuer Company A had a number of inaccurate and incomplete information disclosures. First, Company A made adjustments to various accounts receivable, other receivables, fixed assets, construction in progress, accounts payable and other accounts in the financial statements before reporting, but some of the adjustments were reversed through the closing balance and the current amount. The opening balance was obtained and there was no reasonable basis. Second, Company A did not truthfully and completely disclose the relevant information of the personal card bank account it used, and did not truthfully disclose irregularities such as purchasing large bank acceptance bills through bill intermediaries to pay suppliers ‘goods. Third, there are many omissions and inconsistencies in the information disclosed in Company A’s application documents such as the amount of external fund borrowing, the amount of personal card collection and payment, the amount of third-party collection and cash transaction. The recommendation institution and reporting accountant did not conduct prudent verification on Company A’s accounting foundation, financial internal control and other work, and did not perform their check responsibilities in place.
The second is that the equity holding matters were not disclosed in the prospectus.
The case mentioned that the actual controller of issuer Company C holds part of the issuer’s shares through Company D. During the reporting period, there were cases in which a number of natural persons entrusted the actual controller of the issuer to hold equity in Company D on their behalf. Before the declaration, the dormant shareholder and the actual controller signed a written agreement or orally agreed to terminate the entrusted shareholding relationship, and some verbally agreed that the dormant shareholder would settle the equity transfer payment after the declaration. At the time of application, the issuer did not disclose the above-mentioned equity holding matters in the prospectus, nor did it fully prove that the proxy holding behavior had been completely terminated before application and met the clear requirements for share ownership. The recommendation institution and reporting lawyer failed to pay full attention to and carefully check the clarity of the issuer’s equity, and failed to perform relevant duties properly.
Unfortunately, although the reporter asked DeepSeek to “follow the instructions”, these two cases were not successfully solved.
Bean buns “reveal” the mystery of a case
Then turn your attention to the Beijing Stock Exchange. In the latest issue of the Beijing Stock Exchange’s member newsletter, three cases of continuous supervision of the deposit and use of raised funds and one case of illegal manipulation of the shares of a listed company were disclosed.
In these four cases, Doubao successfully “uncovered” the mystery of illegal manipulation of listed company stocks. This case shows that recently, the China Securities Regulatory Commission launched an investigation and terminated Liu Moumou and Lou Moumou’s manipulation of the stocks of a listed company.
After investigation, Lou was mainly responsible for assisting Liu Moumou in finding a company listed on the New Third Board that had a need to sell stocks. After selecting stocks, Liu Moumou and Lou jointly invested in buying the target stocks, which would increase the stock price to the predetermined target selling price in a short period of time. Subsequently, Liu Moumou used uncertain information to induce other investors to buy stocks. Liu Moumou and Lou Moumou deducted the cost and expenses from the amount of stocks sold and then distributed the income according to the proportion of capital contribution.
The China Securities Regulatory Commission finally decided to order Lou and Liu to deal with the shares of the listed company illegally held by them in accordance with the law; confiscated Liu and Lou’s illegal income totaling 83.6749 million yuan and imposed a fine of 251 million yuan; Liu was subject to a lifelong ban on entering the securities market and a five-year ban on trading in the securities market, and a 10-year ban on entering the securities market and a three-year ban on trading in the securities market.
The answer given by Doubao shows that Liu Moumou and Lou Moumou are Liu Hongtao and Lou Ge respectively. During the period from June 19 to September 28, 2023, the two actually controlled 6 securities accounts, including the “Louge” Orient Fortune Securities Account, manipulating the New Third Board stock “Tengmao Technology”.
Specifically, when the user outputs instructions, more details need to be disclosed before a specific answer can be given. The search source and quantity will also be attached to enhance the credibility of the results. When DeepSeek faced the same case, it was limited by the update date of the reserve knowledge and failed to provide a valid reply.
Today, the popularity of DeepSeek has caused related concept stocks to soar and become a hot investment focus in the capital market. However, there is still a long way to go before its actual application scenarios and commercial implementation. Although it has many successful cases of “solving cases”, it will take time to verify whether it can truly deeply integrate powerful performance into real life and develop more practical applications in the future.
On the road to exploring the AI model to help solve complex problems, the “performance” of Doubao and DeepSeek this time is only the beginning. The market is waiting to see how they will play in the fields of financial supervision, corporate compliance and other fields.
