Why is @Daniel Kokotajlo's estimate of METR's doubling time used for Q1 2026 Timelines Update four months instead of 5-7? I see the following counterevidence and doublechecked it with Claude Sonnet 4.6:

1. The 50% horizons calculated by METR's 1.1 method after o3 reliably fit on a not so fast trend between o3's 2 hours released in Apr 2025 and Gemini 3.1 Pro's 6h 24m in Feb 2026... until Claudes Opus 4.6 and Mythos Preview displayed 12 and 16 hours.
2. The 80% horizons calculated by the same method since o3 and including Opus 4.6 fit onto the same doubling trend, and it is Mythos Preview who becomes a clear exception by doubling the time 2-3 times as opposed to the trend.

If Opus 4.6 is an outlier, then the post-o3 doubling trends are 5-6 months.

Additionally, this requires a reassessment of a major part of the model. Once the present doubling time is increased from 0.33 years to 0.4 or 0.5 years, the timelines are either shifted into the 2030s or require severe scaling (to Mythos +2?)

The alternate low doubling time of 4 months could be based on MirrorCode-like tasks, but MirrorCode emerged on Apr 10, after the timelines update.