Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Agent runtimes and agent operating systems know who may do what. A kernel for scientific work must know three more things: what kind of number it is looking at (exact, estimated or generated), whether a claim reproduces before it enters the world model, and when the world is about to change. We report a kernel built around these three questions. Agent operating systems treat each agent as an application scheduled by a model-centred kernel. We invert that assignment for regulated, traceable settings: the agent loop is implemented once, as the kernel; the model is a resource it calls; an application contributes a workflow graph, its gate policies and a window, and no substrate machinery. The kernel owns four properties: durable runs that pause at a gate for days and survive restarts; principals with grants enforced per tool call; gates as run states; and one provenance activity per tool call, carrying the epistemic class of the result. Deterministic tools may abstain; abstentions are first-class objects. Several agent architectures - a bounded chat, a discovery campaign, a design-make-test-analyze loop - run as graphs on one engine and appear to the scientist as one list of waiting decisions. Nineteen of the twenty-three executable tests are measured in an automated nightly run against the frozen executable, among them durability across restarts, a two-hour wait holding no thread, a foreign agent held at a gate, and a new architecture added with zero kernel changes; the four that are not measured in the cited run are named with their cause.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thorsten Gressling (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: