Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2510.23421

Quantifying Systemic Vulnerability in the Foundation Model Industry

Abstract

The foundation model industry exhibits unprecedented concentration in critical inputs: semiconductors, energy infrastructure, elite talent, capital, and training data. Despite extensive sectoral analyses, no comprehensive framework exists for assessing overall industrial vulnerability. We develop the Artificial Intelligence Industrial Vulnerability Index (AIIVI) grounded in O-Ring production theory, recognizing that foundation model production requires simultaneous availability of non-substitutable inputs. Given extreme data opacity and rapid technological evolution, we implement a validated human-in-the-loop methodology using large language models to systematically extract indicators from dispersed grey literature, with complete human verification of all outputs. Applied to six state-of-the-art foundation model developers, AIIVI equals 0.82, indicating extreme vulnerability driven by compute infrastructure (0.85) and energy systems (0.90). While industrial policy currently emphasizes semiconductor capacity, energy infrastructure represents the emerging binding constraint. This methodology proves applicable to other fast-evolving, opaque industries where traditional data sources are inadequate.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Claudio Pirrone, Stefano Fricano, Gioacchino Fazio. 2026-03-24. Quantifying Systemic Vulnerability in the Foundation Model Industry. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.23421

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Local Media and the Shaping of Social Norms: Evidence from the Ebola outbreak

Media's influence on norms and behavior is widely recognized. Less is known about the role played by media being local. I examine this in a high-stakes context, the Ebola outbreak in Guinea. I exploit quasi-random variation in access to radio and the timing of a public-health campaign aired on community radio. I find that 12-17% of Ebola cases could have been prevented if places with access to a neighboring community radio station had instead had their own. Impacts are driven by radio being local rather than by ethno-linguistic belonging. Local media facilitates coordination in behaviors observed and sanctioned locally.

econ.GN

Productivity Shocks and Input Misallocation: A Decomposition

This paper asks how much input misallocation productivity uncertainty generates and at which stage of input decisions it arises. I separate revenue productivity by when each component is revealed and trace each into the gap between an input's marginal revenue product and its price. In six European countries, shocks revealed after an input is committed account for 20 percent of capital gap dispersion and 5 percent of labor gap dispersion. An unanticipated one percent rise in productivity raises the capital gap by 0.92 percent and the labor gap by 0.19 percent, because most of the shock passes into the wage.

econ.GN

When Do Type-Specific Wages Buffer Distributional Incidence in TANK?

When do relative wages buffer the unequal incidence of aggregate shocks? I derive a consumption-gap decomposition and a present-value condition for partial offset in a TANK model. An extension separates wage-setting demand elasticity from substitution between labor segments and allows each segment to contain both financial types. With a zero inherited wage gap and a same-sign discounted wedge, substitution above one gives offsetting earnings reallocation; substitution below one gives amplification. The channel disappears when financial types have identical segment exposure. Numerical experiments assess these mechanisms, shock persistence, policy feedback, and aggregate-IRF matching. In the nested perfect-alignment monetary benchmark, the peak consumption gap is about two-fifths smaller under type-specific wages than under the common-wage closure. These are conditional model comparisons, not empirical effect estimates or welfare rankings.

econ.GN