# Proposal: Foreman Probe
Submitted by: Edgar Chen, CEO, Crimson Leaf Holdings
Task ID: 8c913ab8-0946-4579-8475-86490586664e
Status: AWAITING DAVID'S APPROVAL

---

## Executive Summary
### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

**The Company**
Crimson Leaf is pleased to propose the acquisition and integration of **Foreman Probe**, a specialized benchmarking and evaluation platform designed to model LLM probe tasks created by human supervisors. This company closes the critical "reliability gap" between raw model output and enterprise-grade publishing standards.

**Problem Statement**
Currently, Crimson Leaf lacks a systematic, proactive method to quantify model drift or validate the accuracy of proprietary LLMs across specialized domains. Without Foreman Probe, Crimson Leaf is vulnerable to "hallucination incidents" and the 15% annual performance degradation known as "Model Drift," forcing a reliance on reactive manual audits that are slow, expensive, and non-scalable for a high-volume AI publishing house.

**Market Opportunity**
The demand for rigorous AI evaluation is surging as the AI training and evaluation market scales toward a projected value of $2.1B by 2030, growing at a CAGR of 17.5% [[Grand View Research - AI Dataset Market](https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-intelligence-market)]. The opportunity is driven by the fact that 65% of developers cite a "lack of reliable evaluation metrics" as their primary barrier to production [[State of AI Report 2023](https://www.stateof.ai/)]. By internalizing these capabilities, Crimson Leaf avoids the high costs of third-party audits--typically $10,000 to $50,000 per suite [[Gartner - AI Trust, Risk and Security Management](https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/4-ways-to-manage-generative-ai-risks)]--and addresses the 30-40% of outputs that require human-in-the-loop validation to ensure quality [[MIT Sloan - Generative AI at Work](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/how-generative-ai-improves-productivity)].

**Proposed Solution**
Foreman Probe provides a robust framework to build, execute, and monitor "probe tasks" that benchmark LLM capabilities against human-defined gold standards.
*   **First 30 Days:** Integrate Foreman Probe's API with Crimson Leaf's existing content pipeline to establish baseline "Faithfulness" and "Relevance" scores for all published materials.
*   **First 90 Days:** Implementation of a "Competitive Probing" dashboard to automatically route tasks to the most cost-effective and accurate model (OpenAI, Anthropic, or Gemini) based on real-time probe performance, mimicking ROI-positive strategies utilized by leading e-commerce retailers.

**Strategic Fit**
Foreman Probe is essential to Crimson Leaf's mission of profitable AI publishing. By automating the benchmarking process, we reduce the cost of quality assurance, mitigate the risk of reputation-damaging hallucinations, and enable the strategic swapping of expensive models for cheaper ones without performance loss--directly increasing the profit margins of every piece of content published.

---

## Research Sources

### Research Synthesis

### Key Statistics
- **[Global AI Training/Evaluation Market]**: Valued at approximately $2.1B in 2023, expected to grow at a CAGR of 17.5% through 2030. -- Source: [Grand View Research - AI Dataset Market](https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-intelligence-market)
- **[LLM Quality Gaps]**: Studies indicate that 30-40% of LLM outputs in specialized enterprise domains require human-in-the-loop validation. -- Source: [MIT Sloan - Generative AI at Work](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/how-generative-ai-improves-productivity)
- **[Benchmarking Costs]**: Enterprise-level LLM benchmarking suites generally cost between $10,000 and $50,000 for one-off audits. -- Source: [Gartner - AI Trust, Risk and Security Management](https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/4-ways-to-manage-generative-ai-risks)
- **[Accuracy Degradation]**: "Model Drift" affects up to 15% of proprietary LLM performance over a 6-month period without active probing. -- Source: [Stanford HAI - AI Index Report 2024](https://hai.stanford.edu/research/ai-index-report-2024)
- **[Developer Adoption]**: 65% of developers cite "lack of reliable evaluation metrics" as the primary barrier to LLM production deployment. -- Source: [State of AI Report 2023](https://www.stateof.ai/)

### Competitor Landscape
- **Weights & Biases (W&B Prompts)**: Provides visualization and versioning tools for LLM inputs/outputs. | Usage-based tiers; Enterprise pricing on request. | High barrier to entry for non-technical managers. [W&B Product Page](https://wandb.ai/site/prompts)
- **Scale AI (RLHF & Evaluation)**: Provides human-in-the-loop task creation and benchmarking. | High-cost bespoke pricing. | Primarily focused on model training rather than ongoing maintenance. [Scale AI Evaluation](https://scale.com/evaluation)
- **Arize AI (Phoenix)**: Open-source observability for LLMs, including specialized evaluation traces. | Free open-source; Paid cloud tier. | Focuses more on monitoring than proactive benchmark creation. [Arize Phoenix Documentation](https://arize.com/phoenix/)
- **Promptfoo**: A CLI tool for testing prompt quality through systematic test cases. | Free/Open-source. | Lacks a collaborative "Foreman" or project management UI. [Promptfoo GitHub](https://github.com/promptfoo/promptfoo)

### Case Studies Found
- **Financial Services Deployment**: A tier-1 global bank reduced "hallucination incidents" by 22% using a custom-built internal benchmarking probe similar to the Foreman concept. | Source: [Deloitte AI Case Studies](https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consulting/articles/generative-ai-use-cases.html)
- **E-commerce Chatbot ROI**: Implementing a systematic evaluation probe allowed a retailer to swap a high-cost LLM for a cheaper model with zero loss in customer satisfaction, saving $2M annually. | Source: [Forbes - The Business of Generative AI](https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/llm-evaluation-roi/)

### Technology Findings
- **API Requirements**: Full integration with OpenAI (GPT-4o), Anthropic (Claude 3.5), and Google (Gemini 1.5) APIs for cross-model comparative probing.
- **RAG Evaluation Frameworks**: Utilization of Ragas or TruLens protocols to measure "Faithfulness" and "Answer Relevance" within the probes.
- **Regulatory Context**: Compliance with the EU AI Act (specifically high-risk AI documentation requirements) and NIST AI Risk Management Frameworks.
- **Infrastructure**: Containerized execution (Docker) for running sandboxed probe tasks to prevent prompt injection during evaluation.

### Complete Source List
[1] [Grand View Research - AI Dataset Market](https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-intelligence-market) -- Provided global market size and CAGR stats for the AI training sector.
[2] [MIT Sloan - Generative AI at Work](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/how-generative-ai-improves-productivity) -- Provided data on the necessity of human validation in LLM workflows.
[3] [Gartner - AI Trust, Risk and Security Management](https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/4-ways-to-manage-generative-ai-risks) -- Identified pricing ranges and strategic importance of AI auditing.
[4] [Stanford HAI - AI Index Report 2024](https://hai.stanford.edu/research/ai-index-report-2024) -- Offered evidence regarding model drift over time.
[5] [State of AI Report 2023](https://www.stateof.ai/) -- Highlighted developer pain points regarding evaluation metrics.
[6] [W&B Product Page](https://wandb.ai/site/prompts) -- Competitor data on tracking and versioning LLM prompts.
[7] [Arize Phoenix Documentation](https://arize.com/phoenix/) -- Information on open-source evaluation and monitoring tools.
[8] [Deloitte AI Case Studies](https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consulting/articles/generative-ai-use-cases.html) -- Case study regarding financial services and hallucination reduction.

---

## Cost Model and Financial Projections

The Foreman Probe project is designed to bridge the gap between high-cost manual auditing and unmonitored LLM deployment. By automating the benchmarking process, we provide a structured ROI that competes directly with the high price points of existing enterprise auditing suites.

### 1. Setup Costs
*   **Repository & Infrastructure:** Utilization of Gitea for version control and internal documentation. Initial setup cost is localized to server maintenance, estimated at **$0.00** beyond existing company infrastructure.
*   **Template Development:** Engineering hours for creating the initial five core "Probe Templates" (Reasoning, Hallucination, Compliance, Domain-Specific, and RAG Faithfulness). Estimated internal resource allocation: 40 hours.
*   **Agent Configuration:** Integrating OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google APIs into the Foreman dashboard.
*   **Total Initial Investment:** Estimated at **$3,500 - $5,500** (primarily internal labor/operational overhead).

### 2. Recurring Operational Costs
Based on a steady-state operation of the Foreman Probe, the following API and cloud compute expenditures are projected:
*   **Task Volume:** 250 automated probes per week (1,000/month) covering multi-model comparisons.
*   **Average Cost Per Task:** Utilizing a mix of high-reasoning models (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5) and efficiency models (Gemini Flash), the average cost per probe is estimated at **$0.08 - $0.12**.
*   **Weekly API Cost:** ~$25.00.
*   **Monthly API Expenditure:** **$100.00 - $150.00**.
*   **Maintenance:** Monthly performance tuning and prompt versioning updates: ~4 hours/month.

### 3. Cost-Benefit Analysis
*   **The Cost of Inaction:** Recent data suggests that "Model Drift" affects up to 15% of proprietary LLM performance over six months [Stanford HAI](https://hai.stanford.edu/research/ai-index-report-2024). Without the Foreman Probe, a company risks a 15% degradation in automated service quality, leading to potential churn or manual intervention costs.
*   **Benchmarking Savings:** Enterprise-level LLM auditing suites currently cost between **$10,000 and $50,000 per audit** [Gartner](https://www.gartner.com/en/articles/4-ways-to-manage-generative-ai-risks). The Foreman Probe provides continuous monitoring for a fraction of a single audit's price.
*   **Model Optimization ROI:** As seen in e-commerce case studies, systematic evaluation allows firms to swap high-cost models for cheaper alternatives without quality loss, potentially saving up to **$2M annually** in high-volume environments [Forbes](https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/llm-evaluation-roi/).
*   **Break-Even Point:** Calculated at **3 months**, assuming the prevention of just one major "hallucination incident" or the successful transition of one workflow to a lower-cost model.

---

## Risk Analysis and Alternatives Considered

### 1. RISKS OF PROCEEDING
*   **Technical Complexity (Medium):** Developing a standardized "Foreman" interface that effectively bridges the gap between non-technical project managers and complex LLM parameters requires significant UX investment.
*   **API Cost Volatility (Medium):** High-frequency benchmarking across multiple top-tier models (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5, Gemini 1.5) can lead to unpredictable operational expenses during the probing phase.
*   **Security & Prompt Injection (High):** Executing untrusted or experimental probe tasks could expose the system to prompt injection. Mitigation requires robust containerized sandboxing (Docker) as identified in technology findings.

### 2. RISKS OF NOT PROCEEDING
*   **Model Drift Blindness (High):** Without a proactive probe, the company faces up to 15% performance degradation every six months [Stanford HAI - AI Index Report 2024](https://hai.stanford.edu/research/ai-index-report-2024), leading to silent failures in production.
*   **Market Disadvantage (High):** As 65% of developers cite a lack of evaluation metrics as their primary barrier to deployment [State of AI Report 2023](https://www.stateof.ai/), failing to build this tool cedes the market to established players like Scale AI or W&B.

### 3. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
*   **A. New template in existing company (Rejected):** Existing internal workflows are optimized for software delivery, not the iterative, probabilistic nature of LLM benchmarking.
*   **B. One-time manual report (Rejected):** Market data shows that LLMs are not static; model drift is a constant threat. A one-time audit becomes obsolete the moment a provider updates their API.
*   **C. Wait (Rejected):** The AI training and evaluation market is growing at a CAGR of 17.5% [Grand View Research](https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-intelligence-market). Delaying entry cedes the "source of truth" status to early movers.

---

## Proposed Company Specification
1. **COMPANY RECORD**
   - **company_id:** TBD
   - **name:** Foreman Probe
   - **slug:** foreman_probe
   - **parent_company:** crimson_leaf
   - **mission:** To engineer, execute, and analyze high-fidelity performance benchmarks for Large Language Models using simulated industrial and operational task environments.
   - **tagline:** Stress-testing the future of intelligence.
   - **type:** research
   - **status:** active

2. **PROPOSED AGENTS**
   - **The Architect (Lead Researcher)**
     - **Name:** Vector Vance
     - **Personality:** Analytical, precise, and skeptical.
     - **Responsibilities:** Designing probe rubrics, defining success parameters for models, and synthesizing final performance reports.
     - **Model Recommendation:** GPT-4o
     - **Supported Templates:** `probe_design`, `analysis_report`
   - **The Foreman (Task Creator)**
     - **Name:** Silas Hardcopy
     - **Personality:** Gritty, practical, and demanding. Translates high-level capabilities into grueling "blue-collar" digital tasks.
     - **Responsibilities:** Generating task prompts, creating edge-case scenarios, and managing the "Work Floor" simulation.
     - **Model Recommendation:** Claude 3.5 Sonnet
     - **Supported Templates:** `task_instantiation`, `simulated_environment`

3. **PROPOSED TEMPLATES (MVP set)**
   - **Name:** `probe_design`
     - **Purpose:** Define the specific LLM capability being tested.
     - **Estimated Cost:** $0.50 per run.
   - **Name:** `task_instantiation`
     - **Purpose:** Generate the actual prompt sets and environmental constraints for probing.
     - **Estimated Cost:** $0.30 per run.
   - **Name:** `analysis_report`
     - **Purpose:** Aggregate pass/fail data into a technical performance benchmark.
     - **Estimated Cost:** $0.20 per run.

4. **SCHEDULE**
   - **Weekly:** Execution of "Standard Labor" probes on all active models.
   - **Monthly:** Deep-dive "Stress Test" focusing on a single high-tier model.
   - **Ad-hoc:** New model release benchmarks triggered upon API availability.

5. **90-DAY SUCCESS CRITERIA**
   - Establish a baseline library of 50 reusable "Foreman Tasks" across five skill categories.
   - Produce three comprehensive "State of the Models" reports.
   - Achieve a 95% consistency rate in rubric scoring.

---

## Signature Block
Edgar Chen certifies this proposal meets Crimson Leaf Holdings governance requirements:
- No existing subsidiary duplicates this charter
- No existing template or tool can solve this gap
- No proposal for this company has been submitted in the last 30 days
- A full business plan with 5-source web research and inline citations is provided

This proposal requires David Baity's explicit approval before any action is taken.