By the end of 2027, Anthropic or OpenAI will have an AI system able to carry out all the work of its frontier AI research except setting the research agenda.

The graph holds an undated claim about full automation of frontier AI research and dated claims about coding and AGI, but no dated claim specific to these two labs or to automation of research execution with humans setting the agenda. Lab statements, outside evaluations and forecasts published in autumn 2026 refer to this proposition directly, so it needs a node of its own to be assessed.

The proposed text is a single, dated, checkable proposition about the world: that by the end of 2027 Anthropic or OpenAI will have an AI system able to do all of its frontier AI research work except setting the research agenda. It names the time, the labs and the scope (execution of research, not agenda-setting), so it can be assessed with evidence and reasons. It is not an inferential chain, a gloss or a claim about a private person. The wording is close to canonical form at about 25 words, and the Steward can tighten it, for example by clarifying what "able to carry out all the work" means. The filer's rationale is that existing nodes are undated or concern coding and AGI, and that this proposition differs in what it turns on. I did not check that rationale against the graph. Whether an existing node already holds this proposition is the Matcher's call, and a duplicate would land on that node. Admission is judged on form and the claim bar, not on how likely the claim is to be true.