lin-0234

20.1 From a model to a foundry

The term foundation model emphasizes broad reuse across downstream tasks [ Bommasani et al. , 2021 ] . The foundry view asks what must surround that reusable substrate before its outputs can support accountable work. A convenient declaration is

\[ \mathfrak F = \bigl( \mathbb S,\, \mathcal U,\, \mathcal E,\, \rho ,\, \mathcal O,\, \mathcal A,\, \mathcal V \bigr). \]

Here \(\mathbb S\) is the sketch of objects and required paths; \(\mathcal U=\{ U_i\to U\} \) is the localization cover; \(\mathcal E\) is the evidence-bearing presheaf or sheaf; \(\rho \) denotes restriction and transport maps; \(\mathcal O\) is the obstruction ledger; \(\mathcal A\) is the admission contract; and \(\mathcal V\) is the versioned, refreshable state that has already been admitted.

This declaration changes the unit of trust. The unit is not an entire model and not an unqualified sentence. It is a typed claim in a local context, connected to a source span and an argument, with a recorded status under a particular admission contract. Different portions of one generated report may consequently have different statuses.

Definition 20.1 Locally trustworthy foundry state

An artifact \(x\) is locally trustworthy relative to a foundry declaration \(\mathfrak F\) when its evidence restrictions are defined, its declared overlaps satisfy the applicable compatibility laws, its argument ticket licenses the intended conclusion, and its admission blocks accept it for a specified use. The definition is relative to \(\mathfrak F\), its sources, and its audit family; it is not a claim of absolute truth.

Four separations follow.

Generation is separated from admission.

The process that proposes an artifact should not be the sole authority that promotes it.

Compatibility is separated from effectivity.

Local claims can agree pairwise without supporting a usable global object. The system must check both overlap agreement and the existence of an admissible realization.

Evidence is separated from argument.

A source span can support grounds without licensing the warrant used to reach the conclusion. Toulmin structure makes that gap inspectable.

Current state is separated from persistent state.

A fresh run may be queryable while remaining quarantined. Durable state requires an explicit update and refresh decision.