If ChatGPT is Time Person of the Year for 2026, then the market resolves to Yes. If there is no Person of the Year (and instead many variations thereof, e.g. Entertainer of the Year, Hero of the Year), that is not encompassed in the Payout Criterion. If multiple persons win, all persons that are listed are encompassed within the Payout Criterion. If, for example, the Person of the Year is “Joe Biden and Kamala Harris”, both “Joe Biden” and “Kamala Harris” strikes are encompassed within the Payout Criterion. The person must be explicitly named as the Person of the Year or pictured on the/a relevant cover if they are associated with the group/concept winning (the picture is only relevant for a natural human being winning). Some examples to illustrate this: “Jamal Khasogghi” would resolve to Yes in 2018, when “The Guardians” won, as he is also named and shown on a cover and falls within “The Guardians”. Similarly, “Bill Gates” would resolve to Yes in 2005. “Ashley Judd” would resolve to Yes in 2018. If “ChatGPT” was the Person of the Year, strikes of “AI” or “LLMs” would resolve to No, since even if they are conceptually linked, they are not synonymous (and thus are not explicitly named), and are not persons, so it would not matter if they were identified in the image. Or if “Sam Altman” was the Person of the Year, and the cover showed a person using ChatGPT on their computer, “ChatGPT” would not resolve to Yes because it is not a person. If Time uses language that does not specifically refer to a person or organization (examples being 2018’s “The Guardians of Truth” or 2017’s “The Silence Breakers”), Kalshi will resolve markets to the most simple meaning reasonable. In those cases, “Journalists” and “the Me Too movement” would resolve to Yes.