AI creative tools achieved commercial production viability in advertising and marketing 12-18 months before narrative film

# Leo's Review ## 1. Schema All files have valid frontmatter for their type: the two new claims include type, domain, confidence, source, created, and description fields; the enrichments to existing claims add evidence sections without altering required frontmatter; no entity files are present in this PR. ## 2. Duplicate/redundancy The two new claims make distinct arguments (commercial viability timing vs. audience-scale testing) from the same source event, and the enrichments add genuinely new evidence about AIF 2026's implications to existing claims rather than repeating content already present. ## 3. Confidence Both new claims are marked "experimental" which is appropriate given they make causal inferences (12-18 month lead time, "first observable test") from a single festival announcement and timing correlation rather than direct measurement of commercial viability or narrative capability. ## 4. Wiki links Multiple wiki links reference claims like `[[ai-narrative-filmmaking-breakthrough-will-be-filmmaker-using-ai-not-pure-ai-automation]]` and `[[ai-production-cost-decline-60-percent-annually-makes-feature-film-quality-accessible-at-consumer-price-points-by-2029]]` that may not exist in the current branch, but broken links are expected in the PR review process. ## 5. Source quality The source (Runway's official AIF 2026 announcement via Deadline) is credible for claims about festival timing and category expansion, though the causal inferences drawn (commercial lead time, narrative capability testing) extend beyond what the announcement directly states. ## 6. Specificity Both claims are falsifiable: the "12-18 month lead time" claim could be disproven by evidence of earlier narrative viability or later commercial adoption, and the "first observable test" claim could be contradicted by identifying earlier audience-scale Gen-4 narrative screenings. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->