# DeepSeek: who controls its compute — Scrutica ## No control relation for DeepSeek in the public record as gathered Every claim below carries the document it came from, who disclosed it, and the date that disclosure speaks to. Where the record holds nothing, the page states whether the public record was searched and what was searched — an unsearched layer and an empty one are different facts. Cite PrintScreenshot 1claims on this record1 attested0 reported0 inferred3 absences with method0 not swept The record speaks Aug 12, 2026 – Aug 12, 2026 · Constraint to Nov 10, 2025 · Disclosure to Aug 12, 2026. Dates are when each underlying disclosure speaks, not when it was read. ### Control Control here means holding title to a facility, operating one, or holding capacity by contract. This record holds none of the three for this organisation; what was searched is stated below. _Plate 1._ Control relationsscrutica.com No control relations in the public record as gatheredsearched Aug 11, 2026 US/EU-visible counterparty disclosures searched (SEC full-text, hosting providers, utilities): none admissible. Press reports a ~1 GW self-built Ulanqab (Inner Mongolia) site and unnamed leased capacity (Bloomberg, 2026-07-30) with no fetchable primary document and no named counterparty — recorded as leads, not rows. _Plate 1._ The control layer reads the control-relations substrate exclusively. The search that produced this empty record is stated above, with its date; leads that could not be reduced to a primary document are recorded as leads, not rows. _Plate 4._ The subject in the tracked universescrutica.com title operation contract _Plate 4._ One bar per organization carrying control relations in the substrate — 16 today — stacked by relation class and ordered by relation count. No bar is DeepSeek: this record holds no control relation, so the subject is not in the population drawn here. The figure is what it is absent from. The distribution reflects the state of that gathering as much as the state of the industry. Across the 16 organisations carrying control relations in this substrate, 7 hold contractual capacity without a single titled facility on record. That pattern is what the three-way split exists to make visible: an attribution model keyed on ownership records the 7 as holding nothing. ### Constraint What regime the organisation sits under, and whether any export-control designation in the Federal-Register-anchored list held here reaches it. A quiet result is reported as a check with its date rather than left as silence. Jurisdiction No headquarters jurisdiction is recorded in the substrate for this organization — a gap on this platform’s side, stated rather than guessed at. Designations No export-control designation is linked to this organization. The cross-reference that would carry such a link resolves **50 organizations** to entries on the Federal-Register-anchored lists; this organization is not among them. The denominator is printed because a zero on its own cannot be told from a check that never ran. The lists themselves last moved on Nov 10, 2025, so a quiet result here reflects the record rather than a stalled feed. ### Disclosure posture What the organisation itself has put on the record with the registries that ask, and which registries reach it at all. Each regime asks a different question of a different population, so each finding carries what that regime counts; nothing here is divided by anything else. Legal entity identifierSearched, nothing on record Global LEI index searched by transliterated name (“DeepSeek”, “High-Flyer”) and native-script name (深度求索, 幻方) on 2026-08-12: no record for the organization. Registry absence reflects identifier adoption in the jurisdiction, not the organization’s structure. Registration of the entity itself in the global LEI system. as of Aug 12, 2026 · [registry record ↗](https://search.gleif.org/) SEC registrant recordRegime does not reach the entity No SEC registrant record is attributed to this organization: it does not file its own periodic reports, so the SEC disclosure regime reaches it only through counterparties that do. Whether the entity itself files with the SEC as a registrant. ### Capacity Facilities this organisation is linked to in the substrate. Frontier-site capacity figures come from Epoch AI’s data-center catalog and are cited to them per record; where Epoch records who owns the AI hardware at a site, that is rendered as what it is — hardware ownership per Epoch — and not as facility ownership or operation. No facility records in the public record as gatheredsearched Aug 11, 2026 No facility in the substrate names this organization as hardware owner, owner, or operator, and no control relation reaches one. US/EU-visible counterparty disclosures searched (SEC full-text, hosting providers, utilities): none admissible. Press reports a ~1 GW self-built Ulanqab (Inner Mongolia) site and unnamed leased capacity (Bloomberg, 2026-07-30) with no fetchable primary document and no named counterparty — recorded as leads, not rows. ### Supply This layer publishes what is known about the completeness of the supply picture, not the picture itself. Some supply records here were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished, so what renders is the epistemic state — position in a distribution, a corroboration class, whether a contradiction was found — and never a relationship, a counterparty, or a count from those sources. Some records behind this layer were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished. What renders here is the epistemic state — position in a distribution, a corroboration class, whether a contradiction was found — and never a relationship, a counterparty or a count from those sources. Position in the tracked graph No supply relationship involving this organization appears in the tracked graph of 5,088 organizations. That is a fact about the graph’s coverage — largely filings-visible and vendor-tracked companies — not a statement that the organization has no suppliers. Corroboration of the control ledger The control ledger names no counterparty pairs to check against the supply corpus, so no corroboration class is derivable. Contradiction check No contradiction between the subscription-licensed corpus and the public-record claims rendered on this page was found in the review of Aug 12, 2026. Where such a contradiction is found, the public claim renders here with a flag that conflicting subscription evidence exists — the flag is the maximum disclosure. ### Working detail — grades, sources, and what is withheld #### 1 · How claims are graded No confidence value is stored anywhere. Each grade is derived when the page renders from three recorded facts — the authority tier of the source, who disclosed it, and whether the value is flagged as an estimate — so a grade cannot disagree with the claim it sits beside. Attested Stated in a primary or research-grade record by the subject, a counterparty to the relation, or a regulator. Reported Carried by press or third-party reporting rather than a party’s own record. Inferred Derived or estimated — including ceilings a party states as “up to” figures. An estimate outranks its source: a ceiling stated in a counterparty’s own press release (“up to 5 GW”) grades inferred, because the number is a bound and not a measurement. #### 2 · Where each layer reads **Control.** `control_relations` only — never a facility’s owner or operator column. Those columns carry, for catalog rows, a copy of the hardware-owner field whose own published definition disclaims facility ownership and operation, so they were retired as attribution sources. **Constraint.** Export-control designations anchored to Federal Register citations, the platform’s designation-to-organisation cross-reference, and rule-derived country access classifications. **Disclosure posture.** The Global LEI Foundation golden copy — registration, parent-reporting declarations, and consolidation records — read by the organisation’s own identifier, plus its SEC registrant record where one exists. **Capacity.** The facilities substrate, with Epoch AI cited per record for catalog rows. #### 3 · How absence is recorded Three states, kept apart everywhere on this page. **Rows**: the record holds claims. **Searched, nothing admissible**: a search was run, its method and date are printed, and what it found could not be reduced to a citable primary. **Not swept**: no search is on file. Collapsing the last two would let a budget limit read as a finding about the world. A lead that cannot be traced to a document is recorded as a lead, never as a row. #### 4 · What is not published, and why Some records here were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished. Where that applies, the published record cites the public primary that establishes it; the subscription source informed only which records to seek and how complete we believe the result to be. No subscription-sourced record, identifier or value is served by this site. That is why the supply layer publishes a percentile band rather than a count, and a corroboration class rather than a list. Those forms cannot be inverted back into the underlying rows, which is the property that makes them publishable at all. Everywhere else on this page, a derived figure prints the operands it was computed from. The four records in this instrument were chosen to span the cases the substrate has to handle: compute held only by contract, compute held by title, compute held by operation, and an organisation the public record barely reaches. Other organisations have [directory entries](/entities/companies); a record like this one exists where the control layer has been swept.