Scientific Hypothesis
Given a population of open-weight language models with compatible architectures, there exists a subset of tensor-level merge operations that produces candidate models with higher aggregate benchmark performance than any single ancestor model. Evolutionary search over merge strategies and model combinations can discover these candidates more efficiently than exhaustive enumeration.
Engineering Objective
Build a modular, documented, and reproducible platform that:- Discovers and imports open-weight models into a versioned ModelRegistry
- Analyzes architectural and tensor compatibility between any pair of models
- Executes merge operations with deterministic, hashed, and fully-provenanced artifacts
- Evaluates candidates on a defined Benchmark Catalog split into Optimization Set, Validation Set, and Hidden Test Set
- Evolves populations of candidates through mutation, crossover, and multi-objective selection
- Quantizes and deploys the best models to offline or air-gapped environments
Commercial Objective
Enable organizations to create specialized, high-performing language models from open-weight bases without:- Proprietary pre-training data
- Multi-million dollar training runs
- Dependency on closed API providers
- License violations from unvetted model combinations
Phase Boundaries
EMEP development is organized into ten phases. Each phase has a hard boundary: no phase begins until the previous phase has passed its acceptance criteria.Explicit Exclusions
The following are permanently excluded from EMEP scope unless a future ADR explicitly reverses the decision.Scope Diagram
The following diagram shows what is inside EMEP scope (solid lines) and what is outside (dashed lines).Related Pages
- Context for the primary research loop and what EMEP is not
- Project Constitution for non-negotiable rules
- Decisions for architecture decision records
- Project Roadmap for phase-level task breakdowns