The benchmark is of course weekly and whilst deviation is possible if it can be justified look at it like this - the occupancy is at a higher risk than say an office (which tests weekly) so how can you justify a lesser standard of testing, especially as you are unlikely to get reliable daily panel checks for faults (as formed part of Sainsbury's case, backed up by lots of statistics on how most faults were discovered, namely daily panel inspections and engineer PPM visits, rarely weekly tests).
It's not impossible, the risk based regime is meant to have flexibility but you have to think of the possible consequences of deviating in your going along with this.
It's true it's easier to manage as some residential sites already accommodate monthly visits for general and emergency lighting checks and could easily slot in the alarm as well, but would struggle with the burden of weekly visits - but that alone isn't enough justification.