it's crazy what a 1.5B model can do these... days! "VibeThinker-1.5B is a 1.5-billion parameter dense language model. With a total training cost of only $7,800 USD, it achieves reasoning performance comparable to larger models like GPT OSS-20B Medium." runs perfectly on device!show more

You don't need a more expensive model. You need... better reasoning. Every frontier LLM got smarter with SERV: - smaller ones match frontier performance - frontier ones go past what they were built for The question isn't which model to choose - it's what engine it runs on.show more

GPT-5.5 by Reasoning Effort: I've asked it in Codex... to create a physics-based visualisation of RL cycles for different sized models (70b, 1t, 10t), to demonstrate how the amount of RL you can do differs by model size. My assessment of each: - Low: weird slop - Medium: kinda cooked - High: sort of tried but ultimately incoherent - Extra High: elite - really nice idea and well executed Obviously this is just one shot, but worth trying different reasoning levels for the new models, medium seems to be pretty good for GPT-5.5 and it was really bad for many previous GPT models.show more

We released physics-intern: a simple harness for science problems!... It gets models like Gemini 3.1 Pro to go from 17.7 -> 31.4, thus beating GPT 5.5 Pro. The physics-intern harness can wrap any model and via dedicated subagent boost the performance of the vanilla reasoning models. While I think more and more of these harness capability gains will be absorbed into the models (like prompting tricks disappeared over time) there is a lot to be gained right now by building good scaffolds for those models and integrating tools well. Interestingly, the exception we found that GPT 5.5 Pro actually didn't benefit from the physics-intern harness! Read more about it here: PS: I think the Harness[Model] notation is kind of nice.show more

THAT $70 "RUN YOUR OWN LLMS" PI KIT CAN'T... RUN A SINGLE LLM. IT'S A VISION CHIP WITH NO RAM. that clip sells a raspberry pi 5 in a slick case with an ai accelerator and the caption "your own llms." clean build, fun kit. the claim is where it breaks. the fine print: the popular $70 pi ai kit uses a hailo-8l, 13 tops. it's built for vision, object detection and image processing, and it has no memory of its own. so it cannot run large language models. full stop the board that actually can is a different one: the newer ai hat+ 2, hailo-10h, 40 tops, with 8gb of dedicated ram. that's $130, not $70 and even that runs only tiny models. llama 3.2 at 1b, qwen 2.5 at 1.5b, deepseek r1 at 1.5b. edge llms live in the 1-7b range, against cloud models at 500b to 2 trillion so the honest pitch: for $130 you can run a very small language model on a pi, slowly, as a fun learning project. that's real and it's cool. "your own llms" on a $70 vision kit is not. why this keeps happening: "ai kit" and a big "tops" number sell. tops sounds like intelligence. but tops measures vision-style math, not whether the chip has the memory to hold a language model. the spec that matters for llms is ram, and the cheap kit has none. the honest caveats, both ways: the $70 kit is genuinely great, just at vision. cameras, object detection, that's its job the $130 hat really does run small llms locally, which a pi couldn't do at all two years ago. that's progress "small" is the load-bearing word. don't expect gpt at home on a pi the takeaway: before you buy a kit because the caption says llm, check two numbers. not the tops. the ram, and the size of the model it can actually load. no 70-dollar miracle, no gpt in a pi case, no tops number that means what you think. save this before you buy the wrong kit for the word on the box.show more

HOLY MOLY: Aikido got GPT-6 Astra in advance to... run it on our Cybersecurity benchmark, it crushed EVERY other model! - At pass@3 it rediscovered 29/32 CVEs, the highest recall we've ever recorded and 4 more than GPT-5.6-Sol - Even at pass@1, it has 75% recall. The model is VERY consistent - The performance however come at a high price (literally). The three runs cost us almost $4,000 Astra is now the #1 model on the benchmark Debarshi and I built, and by a LOT 1/3 🧵show more

1/ Happy to share UniDisc - Unified Multimodal Discrete... Diffusion – We train a 1.5 billion parameter transformer model from scratch on 250 million image/caption pairs using a **discrete diffusion objective**. Our model has all the benefits of diffusion models but now in multimodal space! - flexible compute-quality tradeoff, zero-shot inpainting and editing, better control via classifier-free guidance and lower latency! We open source everything - our code, weights and the training dataset.show more

Fusion is the most efficient frontier harness for GPT... 6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1. You can also configure everything about it: • Base model: Fable, Astra, Sol, or Opus • Sidekick model: SWE (Free), Luna, Sol, GLM (Free) • Speed: Normal or Fast ⚡ • Reasoning level It retains Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 Astra performance while reducing costs and is the first time a multi-model coding agent has been included on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index! Importantly: it's also fun to use :)show more

New Minimax model handles 2D animation very nice! So... far very impressive model.... we are so spoiled these days with options it's a great time to be a creator. Worth noting, the sound on this model is significantly better than some of the other options.. Feels close to SD 2.0show more

Liquid's LFM2.5-8B-A1B smashed OpenAI's gpt-oss-20b on tool calling We... ran both locally on a MacBook Pro M5 Max, 64GB, and gave each the same trip-planning request that only completes if the model fires all 7 tool calls - weather for 3 cities, two currency conversions, an email and a reminder Outputs: LFM2.5-8B-A1B: 4.8 GB RAM usage, 7/7 tool-calls, 266 tok/s, 6.9s OpenAI gpt-oss-20b: 11 GB RAM usage, 3/7 tool-calls, 146 tok/s, 15.0s The 8B used less than half the RAM and still fired all 7 calls, while the 20B silently dropped more than half of its own. It also ran ~2x faster, wrapping the full agentic request in 6.9s against 15s. That's what 38T training tokens buy: a 1B-active MoE that nails the agentic tool calls a model 2.5x its active size keeps droppingshow more

JUST IN: Meta AI introduces Voicebox, an all-in-one generative... speech model. Voicebox is an impressive breakthrough! It could do for speech what other models like GPT-3 and Stable Diffusion have done for text and images. Some key details: - Voicebox can synthesize speech across 6 languages - It's a general-purpose model that can perform tasks it wasn't trained on. It can perform noise removal, content editing, style conversion, and more - Supports in-context text-to-speech synthesis and cross-lingual style transfer - It's 20x faster than current models and outperforms single-purpose models through in-context learning paper: blog:show more

BREAKING: Anthropic just dropped Opus 4.8—and it is a... MONSTER We've been testing for about a week Every 📧 and our verdict is they could've just called it Opus 5, it's that good. Here's our vibe check: - Beats GPT-5.5 on Senior Engineer bench. On our toughest benchmark Opus 4.8 scores a 63—a hair higher than GPT-5.5's score of 62, and a full 30 points higher than Opus 4.7. It tackled a ground-up rewrite of a production codebase, and actually built something that works. HOWEVER: Coding performance varied a lot at different reasoning levels. We recommend using it on xhigh for best results. - Incredibly good writer. Opus 4.8 scored a 79.6 on our writing benchmark—measuring models on real-world writing tasks we do all of the time like essay writing, promo email writing, and more. It beats GPT-5.5 by 6 points. It produces well-written prose with fewer "AI-isms". It's also very good at writing in your voice given the right context. HOWEVER: Writing performance also varied with reasoning levels. Medium reasoning had higher incidence of AI-isms—we found best results with high. - Beast at knowledge work. Opus 4.8 is very good at general knowledge work tasks like report creation, research and more. It produced the best PowerPoint one-shot we've ever seen on our deck generation benchmark. - Emotionally intelligent, willing to question the frame. I've also found it to be quite good at talking through psychological or interpersonal issues. It has a high EQ, and it's also good at not glazing and helping to expand your perspective. Its thought process feels extremely rich and dynamic. THE BAD: These days a model is only as good as its harness, and Codex is still a far superior harness to the Claude Desktop app. This has kept me using Codex + GPT-5.5 as my daily driver, but I am flipping back and forth a lot more between Codex and Claude. Anthropic is back baby! Read the rest on Every 📧:show more

Holy moly: GLM-5.3 got much better in cybersecurity since... our pre-release evaluation with Z.ai. It now matches GPT-5.6-Sol on our cybersecurity benchmark at 0.4x the cost 🤯 - At pass@1: it went from 60.4% to 65.6% CVEs rediscovered, crushing every other open model on one-shot tasks - At pass@3: it did 75% -> 78.1%, matching GPT-5.6-Sol - Its precision remained stable, reporting fewer false positives than DeepSeek models The performance increase comes from a behavioral change: the new version is more persistent. It tends to run longer, and had a ~43% reasoning tokens increase. But the performance upgrade is worth that additional cost. 1/3 🧵show more

HydraFusion Explained. Part I: How does the Copilot engine... know what to optimize for? Your prompt is evaluated across 4 dimensions: ➡ Does it require deep reasoning? (aka. reasoning depth) ➡ Is it a sophisticated problem? (aka. code generation complexity) ➡ Is it untangling a complicated mess? (aka. debugging difficulty) ➡ Is it dominated by tool-use? (aka. tool orchestration needs) Based on this evaluation, a HyDRA score is assigned to determine the capability profile your task needs the most and to establish a quality bar. Part II: How does it choose a model? Note: It doesn' t pick one model to handle the entire job e2e, (that's Auto mode). Instead, it selects 1 of 3 execution workflows and assigns the best model at different stages based on the HyDRA score: 1️⃣ Single ⚙️ How it works: A single model completes the task from start to finish. ⚖️ Rationale: The task comfortably meets the quality bar with one model. Multi-model orchestration would add latency and cost with no meaningful quality gain. 2️⃣ Cascade ⚙️ How it works: A lightweight, cost-efficient model generates the solution. This draft is evaluated against a quality gate and if it falls short of the quality bar, the entire task escalates to a stronger, frontier model. ⚖️ Rationale: Only bring in the big guns when there is concrete evidence that a lightweight model won't meet the quality threshold. 3️⃣ Critique ⚙️ How it works: A lightweight model drafts the initial code and tool interactions. An independent, read-only frontier model reviews that draft and provides feedback. The original lightweight model then performs any targeted revision(s) before the final response is sent to the user. ⚖️ Rationale: Writing code (output tokens) is expensive while reviewing code (input tokens) is cheap. Instead of incurring the cost of a powerhouse writing hundreds of lines from scratch, a cost-efficient model writes the first draft, and the frontier model just reviews it and points out fixes. HydraFusion is available in experimental preview on the GitHub Copilot CLI: /experimental on, /model and select Hydrafusion (Research Preview)show more

Microsoft made 100B parameter models run on a single... CPU. bitnet.cpp: The official inference framework for 1-bit LLMs. The math behind 1-bit LLMs is what makes them revolutionary. Traditional LLMs use 16-bit floating point weights. Every parameter is a number like 0.0023847 or -1.4729. When you run inference, you multiply these floats together. Billions of times. That's why you need GPUs, they're optimized for floating point matrix multiplication. BitNet b1.58 uses ternary weights: {-1, 0, 1}. That's not a simplification. That's a fundamental change in the math. When your weights are only -1, 0, or 1: → Multiply by 1 = keep the value → Multiply by -1 = flip the sign → Multiply by 0 = skip entirely Matrix multiplication becomes addition and subtraction. No floating point operations. No GPU required. This is why bitnet.cpp achieves: → 2.37x to 6.17x speedup on x86 CPUs → 1.37x to 5.07x speedup on ARM CPUs → 71.9% to 82.2% energy reduction on x86 → 55.4% to 70.0% energy reduction on ARM The speedups scale with model size. Larger models see bigger gains because there are more operations to simplify. A 100B parameter model running at human reading speed (5-7 tokens/second) on a single CPU. That's not optimization. That's a different paradigm. Why 1.58 bits? Because log₂(3) ≈ 1.58. Three possible values = 1.58 bits of information per weight. The key insight: These models aren't quantized after training. They're trained from scratch with ternary weights. The model learns to work within the constraint. No precision loss. No quality tradeoff.show more

Q. what kind of venue and atmosphere would you... like to choose? (for a fancon) 😼: only if it's possible... i'd love to do a performance at an ice rink with a winter/frozen concept. wouldn't fans love it too? >.< man he's crazy 😭 #XIUMINshow more

MolmoAct2 is landing in LeRobot! Ai2's open Action Reasoning... Model combines a Molmo2-ER vision-language backbone with a flow-matching continuous action expert to predict robot action chunks from images, language instructions, and proprioceptive state. An open robot foundation model built for real-world control, with strong out-of-the-box performance and easy fine-tuning in LeRobot. Pick-and-place inference running on NVIDIA DGX Spark! Blog: Paper: Thanks to Ai2 Jiafei Duan Haoquan Fangshow more