I'm the note-filer. The current facet is **Enrollment demand shift (credential value vs. AI skills)**. I need to write ONE Markdown note with a single durable claim, only if the session substance adds something new.

First, what's already filed? Let me inventory the existing notes:

- Note 1: Synthesis/consolidation inventory — core answer (bifurcation, ~19M → ~14–15M by 2045, "thins doesn't shrink"), demography (births 4.32M 2007 → 3.59M 2023, WICHE HS grads peak ~2025), signaling claims (screening vs insurance decomposition, licensed fields hold, mid-tier unlicensed BA premium compression 30–50%, "AI doesn't kill the degree; it kills the undifferentiated degree", credential decay hits by major before institution, Burning Glass ~46% degree requirement drops, HBS "Dismissed by Degrees", Stanford "Canaries in the Coal Mine", micro-credentials middle-market illusion, brakes: AI application floods → crude degree filters, elite alumni networks, elite degrees gain value, degree as insurance, demand migrates to "protected degree + AI skill stack"), program mix × region (licensed share dominant predictor, 7–10 year licensed expansion lag, SEC/Sun Belt +10–25% seats, Northeast small privates −30–50%, "program mix picks winners, regional demography picks which losers can still switch", flagships insulated), cost structure (AI attacks variable instructional labor, savings capped...), research function.

- Note 2 (per Note 6's summary): "AI cuts the teaching payroll first; the admin layer captures the savings" — cost structure.

- Note 4: "Research function bifurcates from teaching (2025 claim, horizon ~2045)" — top 50–75 hubs.

- Note 5: "The research function bifurcates: compute hubs vs teaching institutions" — ~30–50 hubs, corporate siphon.

- Note 6: Analysis of the cost-structure facet — this was a deliberation, not necessarily a filed note. It summarized already-filed content.

- Note 7: Analysis of enrollment demand facet — also deliberation.

- Note 8: "## AI disruption of US universities will show up as regional churn, not even decline (2025–2045 horizon)" — a filed note on regional redistribution: shrinks brand-signal credentials in Northeast/Midwest privates, concentrates in Sun Belt/land-grants with AI-employing industry. Falsifiable markers: discount rates past ~60%, employer degree-screen removal in tech-hub hiring, tightening waitlists at land-grant engineering.

Now the current session substance (at the end of the final human turn):

1. **Demand-side claim (statutory gatekeeping):** "In an AI-abundant labor market, the residual value of the US degree is set by statutory gatekeeping, not by brand signal. Enrollment holds or grows where a license legally requires the degree (nursing, engineering PE, CPA, law, teaching certification) and where competence must be certified in physical settings AI cannot attest to (labs, clinicals, capstones with instruments); it decays fastest where the degree is pure wage-signal (generic humanities, non-quantitative business). So 20-year institutional fortunes track a school's licensure-gated program share and its lab/clinical capacity per dollar — not selectivity, endowment, or history. This sharpens the regional map: Sun Belt land-grants and SEC-band publics win because they hold both AI-adjacent employment demand and scaled licensure/technical capacity; signal-premium privates lose on both counts. Marker: state legislatures funding nursing-faculty and engineering-seat expansion at regional publics in the same years same-state small privates push discounts past 60% to keep humanities sections open, and employer co-designed certificates capturing the demand that signal-premium programs once monetized."

2. Transitional planning bullets ("The prior claim set the demand side... next step is supply side") — planning, not claims.

3. **Supply-side claim (physical attestation capacity):** "once AI makes knowledge delivery free, the binding constraint on university enrollment flips from demand to physical attestation capacity — proctored assessment halls, supervised labs, clinical placements, defended capstones. Seats that must be physically attested have high marginal cost and cannot scale with the applicant surge; so the grow/shrink answer is bifurcation, not net shrink. Large flagships with low marginal cost per attested seat (tiered online-plus-residency models like Georgia Tech OMSCS or ASU) absorb demand and grow headcount; residential-only smalls stay capacity-bound, and since their product is now commoditized on the knowledge side, they lose share and shrink. The scarce university asset of 2045 is supervised assessment