Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

No one else can do this. While every other CV platform is still selling another fine-tuning dashboard We’re about to let anyone order actual frontier lab work in a few clicks. The kind only Bittensor miners can deliver. Model Foundry is coming to Score Studio. Zero compute? Zero data?... show more

Score

9,741 subscribers

24,327 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии Образование Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

$Roboflow charges you for models you have to verify yourself. Introducing Score Studio: the decentralised alternative where every model arrives already proven and ready to work in real world conditions. Every model on the platform is battle-tested through SN44's validation mechanism before you ever touch it. Miners compete, validators score, only the winners survive. You get the output of a permanent open competition, at a fraction of the price. Datasets, annotation, training, deployment. All of it cheaper. All of it validated, accurate and efficient. Need a model that doesn't exist yet? Launch your own model inquiry from the Studio and put the network to work on it. Pay in USD or SN44, straight at subnet level. We're putting the final touches on it now.$

Roboflow charges you for models you have to verify yourself. Introducing Score Studio: the decentralised alternative where every model arrives already proven and ready to work in real world conditions. Every model on the platform is battle-tested through SN44's validation mechanism before you ever touch it. Miners compete, validators score, only the winners survive. You get the output of a permanent open competition, at a fraction of the price. Datasets, annotation, training, deployment. All of it cheaper. All of it validated, accurate and efficient. Need a model that doesn't exist yet? Launch your own model inquiry from the Studio and put the network to work on it. Pay in USD or SN44, straight at subnet level. We're putting the final touches on it now.

Score

35,419 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Tune Studio is an end-to-end platform for developing applications using Large Language Models. So far, I haven't seen any other platform like this one. You can do everything here: 1. You can curate your data. 2. Use the playground to play with different models and try your ideas. 3. Fine-tune an open-source model on your data. 4. Deploy the model when you are done. This is awesome for anyone building generative AI applications. You can use Tune Studio to work with any of the open-source models out there. They were one of the few companies to host Llama 2 and Llama 3 before anyone else. Here is a link to check it out: One of their main selling points is that Tune Studio scales! You don't have to worry about serving your model to lots of users. They also have built-in user management, authentication, on-prem support, user context management, and pretty much everything you need to build generative AI applications. Thanks to the Tune team for collaborating with me on this post. We are living through the best years of development tools for AI developers. The field is unstoppable.

Tune Studio is an end-to-end platform for developing applications using Large Language Models. So far, I haven't seen any other platform like this one. You can do everything here: 1. You can curate your data. 2. Use the playground to play with different models and try your ideas. 3. Fine-tune an open-source model on your data. 4. Deploy the model when you are done. This is awesome for anyone building generative AI applications. You can use Tune Studio to work with any of the open-source models out there. They were one of the few companies to host Llama 2 and Llama 3 before anyone else. Here is a link to check it out: One of their main selling points is that Tune Studio scales! You don't have to worry about serving your model to lots of users. They also have built-in user management, authentication, on-prem support, user context management, and pretty much everything you need to build generative AI applications. Thanks to the Tune team for collaborating with me on this post. We are living through the best years of development tools for AI developers. The field is unstoppable.

Santiago

39,101 просмотров • 2 лет назад

When we started Score, the standard computer vision tools already existed. About a million people use them every day. Most of those people are still waiting on labels, running training jobs by hand, and watching models fail once they leave the test set. Most of those people are still waiting on labels, running training jobs by hand, and watching models fail once they leave the test set. Most of those people are also still waiting on verified computer vision models, evaluated against real life conditions and ready to be deployed for them to deliver value for their teams, clients or users. Score Studio is the full computer vision path in one place. A team describes the problem. The system can generate the missing scenes, label them, train the candidates, evaluate which ones actually hold, and deploy the winner. Data, labels, training, eval, ship. One loop. If no model exists for that job yet, they can put a bounty on the subnet. Anything from a small vision brick to a full VLM. Miners compete on the task. Only the winning work comes back. Same path for software agents. Any agent can call it. Built to be fully agent-accessible. Built for the people who already do this work: computer vision engineers and the small teams around them in plants, warehouses, farms, robotics, sport, and security. And for the agents those teams will run. That is the part that changes the job. Not another training screen. The stretch that used to take a lab and a calendar, footage, boxes, versions, failed runs, a separate deploy project, sits behind one starting point. And if the network needs a new model, that request is part of the same path. We spent more than a year building it. Then we had a choice. Keep it for us, or commoditize the whole subnet and make it available 24/7, in permissionless and open-source way. And we knew we couldn't keep it for us. It had to live on Bittensor. Open source software already showed how this should work. Infrastructure should not sit inside one company. Same idea as open AI before the phrase changed meaning: inspect it, fork it, keep building. That is what SN44 is for. Open vision intelligence, powered by Bittensor. Miners do the work. Studio is how that gets monetized. Profit does not stay in a company account. It goes back into the subnet through buyback and burn. We built the tool we wanted on day one. It will live on the network now, and for ever. Waitlist is open.

When we started Score, the standard computer vision tools already existed. About a million people use them every day. Most of those people are still waiting on labels, running training jobs by hand, and watching models fail once they leave the test set. Most of those people are still waiting on labels, running training jobs by hand, and watching models fail once they leave the test set. Most of those people are also still waiting on verified computer vision models, evaluated against real life conditions and ready to be deployed for them to deliver value for their teams, clients or users. Score Studio is the full computer vision path in one place. A team describes the problem. The system can generate the missing scenes, label them, train the candidates, evaluate which ones actually hold, and deploy the winner. Data, labels, training, eval, ship. One loop. If no model exists for that job yet, they can put a bounty on the subnet. Anything from a small vision brick to a full VLM. Miners compete on the task. Only the winning work comes back. Same path for software agents. Any agent can call it. Built to be fully agent-accessible. Built for the people who already do this work: computer vision engineers and the small teams around them in plants, warehouses, farms, robotics, sport, and security. And for the agents those teams will run. That is the part that changes the job. Not another training screen. The stretch that used to take a lab and a calendar, footage, boxes, versions, failed runs, a separate deploy project, sits behind one starting point. And if the network needs a new model, that request is part of the same path. We spent more than a year building it. Then we had a choice. Keep it for us, or commoditize the whole subnet and make it available 24/7, in permissionless and open-source way. And we knew we couldn't keep it for us. It had to live on Bittensor. Open source software already showed how this should work. Infrastructure should not sit inside one company. Same idea as open AI before the phrase changed meaning: inspect it, fork it, keep building. That is what SN44 is for. Open vision intelligence, powered by Bittensor. Miners do the work. Studio is how that gets monetized. Profit does not stay in a company account. It goes back into the subnet through buyback and burn. We built the tool we wanted on day one. It will live on the network now, and for ever. Waitlist is open.

Score

11,292 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Choose a model (any model) and build your application with it. Do not spend time swapping models early on. Do not try to optimize before you have a working system. This is one of the first recommendations I make to every new team I consult with. Eventually, it will be time to optimize the model. • You may need a cheaper model • You may need a faster model • You might need a smarter model Good luck if you stitched together 12 different APIs and SDKs from 7 different vendors. Over half of the companies I consult for run on Microsoft software and have access to Microsoft Foundry. Microsoft Foundry is a complete agentic ecosystem. If you're in that world and building AI applications, Microsoft Foundry is where everything lives: • Models (largest selection in the market) • Agentic SDK (Python, C#, JavaScript/TypeScript) • Tools • Evaluations • Monitoring They are fully integrated with GitHub and Visual Studio Code. The best part: Their agentic platform is fully agnostic of the models you use. You can integrate with any model using the same OpenAI-style API. Swapping one model for another takes 1 second.

Choose a model (any model) and build your application with it. Do not spend time swapping models early on. Do not try to optimize before you have a working system. This is one of the first recommendations I make to every new team I consult with. Eventually, it will be time to optimize the model. • You may need a cheaper model • You may need a faster model • You might need a smarter model Good luck if you stitched together 12 different APIs and SDKs from 7 different vendors. Over half of the companies I consult for run on Microsoft software and have access to Microsoft Foundry. Microsoft Foundry is a complete agentic ecosystem. If you're in that world and building AI applications, Microsoft Foundry is where everything lives: • Models (largest selection in the market) • Agentic SDK (Python, C#, JavaScript/TypeScript) • Tools • Evaluations • Monitoring They are fully integrated with GitHub and Visual Studio Code. The best part: Their agentic platform is fully agnostic of the models you use. You can integrate with any model using the same OpenAI-style API. Swapping one model for another takes 1 second.

Santiago

12,014 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.

Jensen Huang was asked whether AI's future is open source or proprietary the question the whole industry keeps fighting over. He didn't pick a side. He said something that quietly ends the fight. "models is a technology, not a product. Model is a technology, not a service" "For the vast majority of consumers, the horizontal layer, the general intelligence, I would really, really love not to go fine-tune my own" "all these industries, their domain expertise, their specialization has to be channeled, has to be captured in a way that they can control, and that it can only come from open models" "the open model industry we're contributing tremendously to it is near the frontier" Everyone else is arguing about which lab wins OpenAI or Anthropic, who has the smartest frontier model this quarter. Jensen is standing on stage saying that's the sideshow. The proprietary model is the convenience layer you rent when you don't care. The open model is the thing you own when the work is yours. Two different products for two different needs not two horses in one race. open models are the second-biggest in the room. Ahead of Anthropic. Behind only OpenAI.

Vikram M

12,078 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Score Studio won't be limited to the models trained (past, present or future) on the subnet. You'll be able to run the rest of the computer vision stack in the same app. This is our quantized SAM3, used inside Score Studio, on Djokovic vs Nadal from the 2013 US Open final. Both players stay tracked for the whole point. Every step is drawn as a trail on the court. As the rally goes on, those trails build into a cluster: one map of where they ran. Two players, one of the longest rallies in the sport, held without losing either one, processed through a small, fast and efficient open-source segmentation model.

Score Studio won't be limited to the models trained (past, present or future) on the subnet. You'll be able to run the rest of the computer vision stack in the same app. This is our quantized SAM3, used inside Score Studio, on Djokovic vs Nadal from the 2013 US Open final. Both players stay tracked for the whole point. Every step is drawn as a trail on the court. As the rally goes on, those trails build into a cluster: one map of where they ran. Two players, one of the longest rallies in the sport, held without losing either one, processed through a small, fast and efficient open-source segmentation model.

Score

21,084 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

The open-source & open-weight frontier is 7 months behind the closed-model frontier. Let’s talk about it. Check out last week’s episode for the reasons why you might want to consider open-source & open-weight models. Welcome to the fourth episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! We have been discussing open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments! This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so rest assured your questions are shared with many others!

The open-source & open-weight frontier is 7 months behind the closed-model frontier. Let’s talk about it. Check out last week’s episode for the reasons why you might want to consider open-source & open-weight models. Welcome to the fourth episode of the Open Model Series with merve, Hugging Face AI/ML engineer & open-sourceress! We have been discussing open-source & open-weight AI: what it is, how it works, and how you can run them on your own compute. Please leave all your questions about open-source & open-weight AI in the comments! This is a super important topic that is novel to most people, and it can be challenging to grasp - so rest assured your questions are shared with many others!

Harper Carroll

17,279 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

You can now try Llama 3.1 405B for free (link below)! This is the largest open-source model out there, and for the first time, an open model is competitive with closed models. This time around, Meta did something new: Llama 3.1 has a license that allows developers to use it to enhance other models. For the first time, you can distill Llama 3.1 405B's capabilities into a smaller, more practical model for your use case. First, here is the link where you can play with Llama 3.1 for free: The model is hosted in Tune Studio, an end-to-end platform for developing applications using Large Language Models. They are sponsoring this post. Take a look at the attached video. It will show you how you can fine-tune a simple model using Llama 3.1 without leaving the platform: 1. You can create an empty dataset 2. Use the playground to generate and record interactions with Llama 3.1 3. Modify the dataset directly using the playground 4. Export the data and fine-tune a smaller model Fast and easy! As long as you have a web browser, you can start experimenting with fine-tuning and Llama 3.1. That's all it takes!

You can now try Llama 3.1 405B for free (link below)! This is the largest open-source model out there, and for the first time, an open model is competitive with closed models. This time around, Meta did something new: Llama 3.1 has a license that allows developers to use it to enhance other models. For the first time, you can distill Llama 3.1 405B's capabilities into a smaller, more practical model for your use case. First, here is the link where you can play with Llama 3.1 for free: The model is hosted in Tune Studio, an end-to-end platform for developing applications using Large Language Models. They are sponsoring this post. Take a look at the attached video. It will show you how you can fine-tune a simple model using Llama 3.1 without leaving the platform: 1. You can create an empty dataset 2. Use the playground to generate and record interactions with Llama 3.1 3. Modify the dataset directly using the playground 4. Export the data and fine-tune a smaller model Fast and easy! As long as you have a web browser, you can start experimenting with fine-tuning and Llama 3.1. That's all it takes!

Santiago

55,609 просмотров • 2 лет назад

We’re excited to be integrating SERV Reasoning by OpenServ to bring our no-code robotics solution to market, and had the pleasure of joining their closed beta. Advanced robotics used to require a full team of specialists. Now you can build real behavior in our no-code studio — this Unitree G1 hand grasp function was entirely written by the serv-standard model inside ROBA's no-code studio. This is just a small glimpse of what can be done in our platform. In our benchmarks across real builder tasks, SERV's models matched the quality bar we needed while cutting AI costs by over 80%. SERV Reasoning will now be the default inference engine for the upcoming release of our ROBA no-code studio on June 1st.

We’re excited to be integrating SERV Reasoning by OpenServ to bring our no-code robotics solution to market, and had the pleasure of joining their closed beta. Advanced robotics used to require a full team of specialists. Now you can build real behavior in our no-code studio — this Unitree G1 hand grasp function was entirely written by the serv-standard model inside ROBA's no-code studio. This is just a small glimpse of what can be done in our platform. In our benchmarks across real builder tasks, SERV's models matched the quality bar we needed while cutting AI costs by over 80%. SERV Reasoning will now be the default inference engine for the upcoming release of our ROBA no-code studio on June 1st.

Roba Labs

34,287 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

MolmoAct2 runs zero-shot on an SO-ARM101, no training required 🦾 Ai2 open Action Reasoning Model is now in LeRobot with the full lifecycle covered: fine-tuning (full or LoRA), evaluation, and real-robot deployment. It pairs a Molmo2-ER vision-language backbone with a flow-matching action expert to turn images, language, and proprioceptive state into action chunks. The best part: ready-made checkpoints ship with calibration correction baked in, so you can point it at your SO-100/101 and just watch it work. Inference fits in ~12GB at bf16, and LoRA fine-tuning runs on a single 24GB GPU. Big thanks to the Ai2 team for building this in the open.

MolmoAct2 runs zero-shot on an SO-ARM101, no training required 🦾 Ai2 open Action Reasoning Model is now in LeRobot with the full lifecycle covered: fine-tuning (full or LoRA), evaluation, and real-robot deployment. It pairs a Molmo2-ER vision-language backbone with a flow-matching action expert to turn images, language, and proprioceptive state into action chunks. The best part: ready-made checkpoints ship with calibration correction baked in, so you can point it at your SO-100/101 and just watch it work. Inference fits in ~12GB at bf16, and LoRA fine-tuning runs on a single 24GB GPU. Big thanks to the Ai2 team for building this in the open.

LeRobot

23,339 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

The entire AI industry is racing to build the smartest model. Satya Nadella just admitted that is not where the money is. The model is not the product. The harness is. That is the exact line. And it changes what Microsoft is actually competing on. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, Meta every frontier lab is pouring hundreds of billions into training compute, chasing the next capability jump. Each betting that raw model intelligence is the moat. Microsoft is doing the opposite. It is building the harness the orchestration layer that sits above the model, connecting it to tools, data, permissions, sub-agents, and enterprise workflows. And it is letting OpenAI, Anthropic, and MAI compete to plug into it. "You need the model. But the model is not the product. The harness is." So do the math on what a harness actually does. A raw model dropped into an enterprise answers questions. That is a chatbot. A harness turns that same model into an agent that reads the SharePoint, edits the ERP entry, pulls the GitHub PR, updates Salesforce, and files the Excel report with the right permissions, the right audit trail, and the right sub-agent for each sub-task. The model provides the intelligence. The harness converts intelligence into work. Now here's where it gets interesting. "Even the best model in the world will feel broken without a great harness. And an okay model with a great harness can feel like magic." If that is true, the enterprise buyer is not buying model quality. The enterprise buyer is buying the harness. Which means model quality becomes a commodity input over time, and harness quality becomes the sustainable moat. Compare that to the strategy the entire frontier lab industry is executing. Everyone else is chasing the numerator raw intelligence. Almost nobody at scale is racing to build the denominator the orchestration layer that determines whether that intelligence can actually be deployed profitably inside a real company. The frontier model race has a 10 to 20 percent chance of producing a single dominant winner. Nadella just told the industry he does not need to be that winner. If OpenAI wins, Microsoft wins. If Anthropic wins, Microsoft wins. If MAI wins, Microsoft wins. If someone Microsoft has never heard of trains a better model in 2027, Microsoft still wins. Because the compute they train on, the harness they get plugged into, the enterprise contracts they get delivered through, and the products they sit inside are all Microsoft. He is not building the best AI model. He is building the layer that the best AI model has to run on to make anyone money. I wonder which position looks more valuable in ten years.

The entire AI industry is racing to build the smartest model. Satya Nadella just admitted that is not where the money is. The model is not the product. The harness is. That is the exact line. And it changes what Microsoft is actually competing on. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, Meta every frontier lab is pouring hundreds of billions into training compute, chasing the next capability jump. Each betting that raw model intelligence is the moat. Microsoft is doing the opposite. It is building the harness the orchestration layer that sits above the model, connecting it to tools, data, permissions, sub-agents, and enterprise workflows. And it is letting OpenAI, Anthropic, and MAI compete to plug into it. "You need the model. But the model is not the product. The harness is." So do the math on what a harness actually does. A raw model dropped into an enterprise answers questions. That is a chatbot. A harness turns that same model into an agent that reads the SharePoint, edits the ERP entry, pulls the GitHub PR, updates Salesforce, and files the Excel report with the right permissions, the right audit trail, and the right sub-agent for each sub-task. The model provides the intelligence. The harness converts intelligence into work. Now here's where it gets interesting. "Even the best model in the world will feel broken without a great harness. And an okay model with a great harness can feel like magic." If that is true, the enterprise buyer is not buying model quality. The enterprise buyer is buying the harness. Which means model quality becomes a commodity input over time, and harness quality becomes the sustainable moat. Compare that to the strategy the entire frontier lab industry is executing. Everyone else is chasing the numerator raw intelligence. Almost nobody at scale is racing to build the denominator the orchestration layer that determines whether that intelligence can actually be deployed profitably inside a real company. The frontier model race has a 10 to 20 percent chance of producing a single dominant winner. Nadella just told the industry he does not need to be that winner. If OpenAI wins, Microsoft wins. If Anthropic wins, Microsoft wins. If MAI wins, Microsoft wins. If someone Microsoft has never heard of trains a better model in 2027, Microsoft still wins. Because the compute they train on, the harness they get plugged into, the enterprise contracts they get delivered through, and the products they sit inside are all Microsoft. He is not building the best AI model. He is building the layer that the best AI model has to run on to make anyone money. I wonder which position looks more valuable in ten years.

Vikram M

21,463 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

The teams shipping AI agents right now are bleeding money on the dumbest possible expense: teaching a 400B-parameter model to read a file name. Every time an AI agent needs to "see" something today, it routes an image through a frontier model. OCR, object detection, checking if a button exists on screen. You're paying GPT-4o or Claude pricing for tasks that require perception, not reasoning. One agent workflow processing a few thousand screenshots per day can burn through more on vision calls than on the actual thinking. Perceptron's Isaac is 2B parameters. Built by the team that created Meta's Chameleon multimodal models. On perceptive benchmarks, it matches or beats models 50x its size. The VQA, OCR, and object detection scores are competitive with models running on infrastructure that costs orders of magnitude more. The MCP wrapper is the distribution play. One install command and every Claude Code agent can offload vision tasks to a model that runs on a single consumer GPU. The agent keeps its reasoning in the frontier model and routes perception to a specialist. That split is how you get vision-heavy agent workflows from "technically possible but expensive" to "cheap enough to run on everything." This is the same pattern that won in every other compute-intensive stack. General-purpose handles orchestration. Specialists handle the heavy lifting. Graphics went through it. Audio went through it. Video encoding went through it. Vision in AI agents is next. The teams building agents that see 10,000 images a day will care about this before anyone else does.

The teams shipping AI agents right now are bleeding money on the dumbest possible expense: teaching a 400B-parameter model to read a file name. Every time an AI agent needs to "see" something today, it routes an image through a frontier model. OCR, object detection, checking if a button exists on screen. You're paying GPT-4o or Claude pricing for tasks that require perception, not reasoning. One agent workflow processing a few thousand screenshots per day can burn through more on vision calls than on the actual thinking. Perceptron's Isaac is 2B parameters. Built by the team that created Meta's Chameleon multimodal models. On perceptive benchmarks, it matches or beats models 50x its size. The VQA, OCR, and object detection scores are competitive with models running on infrastructure that costs orders of magnitude more. The MCP wrapper is the distribution play. One install command and every Claude Code agent can offload vision tasks to a model that runs on a single consumer GPU. The agent keeps its reasoning in the frontier model and routes perception to a specialist. That split is how you get vision-heavy agent workflows from "technically possible but expensive" to "cheap enough to run on everything." This is the same pattern that won in every other compute-intensive stack. General-purpose handles orchestration. Specialists handle the heavy lifting. Graphics went through it. Audio went through it. Video encoding went through it. Vision in AI agents is next. The teams building agents that see 10,000 images a day will care about this before anyone else does.

Aakash Gupta

55,978 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

How can you solve complex tasks using a Large Language Model? Here is a 2-minute introduction to everything you need to know to 10x the quality of your results. Let's talk about three techniques, in order of complexity, starting with the easiest one: • In-Context Learning • Indexing + In-Context Learning • Fine-tuning In-Context Learning The team that trained GPT-3 found something they couldn't explain: You can condition a model using examples of how you want it to behave. I included an example prompt in the attached video. You can "teach" the model how you want it to interpret questions, select the correct answers, and format the results by giving a few examples. You can also give specific knowledge to the model that will be helpful when formulating answers. We call this approach "grounding the model." There's another example in the video. Indexing + In-Context Learning Unfortunately, there is a limit to how much data you can include in a prompt. We call this the "context size." One version of GPT-4 supports a context of approximately 6,000 words, while the other supports 25,000 words. Although this sounds like a lot, many applications need more than that. Imagine you wrote a book and want to build an application to answer any questions about your story. What happens if your book is longer than the context? That's where Indexing comes in. Using a model, you can turn every book passage into an embedding. These are vectors, numbers that "encode" the passage's text. You can then store these embeddings in a particular database that supports fast retrieval of these vectors. You can then turn any question into an embedding and search the database for the list of passages that are similar to that query. Instead of using the entire book to ask the model, you can now use the relevant passages as in-context information, effectively working around the context size limitation. Fine-tuning Fine-tuning can give you an extra boost to get reliable outputs from your LLM. It is, however, the most complex approach on the list. There are different approaches to fine-tuning a model with your data. A popular technique is to process your data with your LLM and use the outputs to train a new classifier that solves your specific task. Notice that here you aren't modifying the LLM. Instead, you are chaining it with your trained classifier. Another approach is to modify the parameters of the LLM using your data. Think of this as "rewiring" the model in a way that solves your particular task. The results and costs will vary depending on how many layers you want to fine-tune from the original model. Many companies think that fine-tuning is the solution to their problems. In my experience, many will benefit from exploring the other two approaches. I love explaining Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence ideas. If you enjoy in-depth content like this, follow me Santiago so you don't miss what comes next.

How can you solve complex tasks using a Large Language Model? Here is a 2-minute introduction to everything you need to know to 10x the quality of your results. Let's talk about three techniques, in order of complexity, starting with the easiest one: • In-Context Learning • Indexing + In-Context Learning • Fine-tuning In-Context Learning The team that trained GPT-3 found something they couldn't explain: You can condition a model using examples of how you want it to behave. I included an example prompt in the attached video. You can "teach" the model how you want it to interpret questions, select the correct answers, and format the results by giving a few examples. You can also give specific knowledge to the model that will be helpful when formulating answers. We call this approach "grounding the model." There's another example in the video. Indexing + In-Context Learning Unfortunately, there is a limit to how much data you can include in a prompt. We call this the "context size." One version of GPT-4 supports a context of approximately 6,000 words, while the other supports 25,000 words. Although this sounds like a lot, many applications need more than that. Imagine you wrote a book and want to build an application to answer any questions about your story. What happens if your book is longer than the context? That's where Indexing comes in. Using a model, you can turn every book passage into an embedding. These are vectors, numbers that "encode" the passage's text. You can then store these embeddings in a particular database that supports fast retrieval of these vectors. You can then turn any question into an embedding and search the database for the list of passages that are similar to that query. Instead of using the entire book to ask the model, you can now use the relevant passages as in-context information, effectively working around the context size limitation. Fine-tuning Fine-tuning can give you an extra boost to get reliable outputs from your LLM. It is, however, the most complex approach on the list. There are different approaches to fine-tuning a model with your data. A popular technique is to process your data with your LLM and use the outputs to train a new classifier that solves your specific task. Notice that here you aren't modifying the LLM. Instead, you are chaining it with your trained classifier. Another approach is to modify the parameters of the LLM using your data. Think of this as "rewiring" the model in a way that solves your particular task. The results and costs will vary depending on how many layers you want to fine-tune from the original model. Many companies think that fine-tuning is the solution to their problems. In my experience, many will benefit from exploring the other two approaches. I love explaining Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence ideas. If you enjoy in-depth content like this, follow me Santiago so you don't miss what comes next.

Santiago

384,573 просмотров • 3 лет назад

Computer vision engineers are still duct-taping tools together just to get a model into production. We just finished another round of user interviews and that frustration came up again and again. So we re-designed Studio to work around our new Pipelines + Workflow Canvas features. Visually design any vision pipeline from start to finish, connect models, logic, and outputs on one canvas, preview the exact result, then deploy. You see the output before you ship it. Everything in a single interface. The full loop, shaped by the people who actually build vision systems every day. This is what Decentralized Vision Intelligence looks like.

Computer vision engineers are still duct-taping tools together just to get a model into production. We just finished another round of user interviews and that frustration came up again and again. So we re-designed Studio to work around our new Pipelines + Workflow Canvas features. Visually design any vision pipeline from start to finish, connect models, logic, and outputs on one canvas, preview the exact result, then deploy. You see the output before you ship it. Everything in a single interface. The full loop, shaped by the people who actually build vision systems every day. This is what Decentralized Vision Intelligence looks like.

Score

11,008 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

this is pure f*cking gold for anyone running coding agents Jev founder, Diogo Almeida, wrote a guide on building a Jev harness the expensive model only writes the code. every fork around it goes to Jev the bill: > 6,000 forks a day on a frontier model: $180 > the same 6,000 forks on Jev: $0.25 > the whole harness, patches included: about $24 99 percent of what's left is the code itself, which is the only part you should be paying for what's inside: > the turn snapshot, five hooks, the cascade > thresholds read off your own receipts > the one rule a model never gets a vote on one evening of setup and your agent stops paying frontier prices to answer yes or no ↓

this is pure f*cking gold for anyone running coding agents Jev founder, Diogo Almeida, wrote a guide on building a Jev harness the expensive model only writes the code. every fork around it goes to Jev the bill: > 6,000 forks a day on a frontier model: $180 > the same 6,000 forks on Jev: $0.25 > the whole harness, patches included: about $24 99 percent of what's left is the code itself, which is the only part you should be paying for what's inside: > the turn snapshot, five hooks, the cascade > thresholds read off your own receipts > the one rule a model never gets a vote on one evening of setup and your agent stops paying frontier prices to answer yes or no ↓

Hanako

20,837 просмотров • 15 дней назад

Emerging as the global frontier of model-reasoning has been a core vision of Affine since its inception. In pursuit of this vision, we've been working relentlessly to forge a repeatable training loop: a mechanism that uses benchmark driven post-training methodology to facilitate the improvement of reasoning itself. Through applying our training methodology onto Qwen3-32B as our base model, Affine’s miners have been able to push the Pareto frontier outward. We’ve now reached saturation; our models have become so good at reasoning that any further improvements are producing diminishing returns. As a result we now move our base model to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B. It provides a stronger basis, offering an extended context window, as well as an improved foundation for agentic work. The same training methodology will be applied going forward. Our objective is no longer simply to improve a single model, but to demonstrate that the process in itself is repeatable, scalable, and model agnostic. We view the commoditization of reasoning as vital to ensure our technology is not only transparent, but also co-owned by humanity.

Emerging as the global frontier of model-reasoning has been a core vision of Affine since its inception. In pursuit of this vision, we've been working relentlessly to forge a repeatable training loop: a mechanism that uses benchmark driven post-training methodology to facilitate the improvement of reasoning itself. Through applying our training methodology onto Qwen3-32B as our base model, Affine’s miners have been able to push the Pareto frontier outward. We’ve now reached saturation; our models have become so good at reasoning that any further improvements are producing diminishing returns. As a result we now move our base model to Qwen3.6-35B-A3B. It provides a stronger basis, offering an extended context window, as well as an improved foundation for agentic work. The same training methodology will be applied going forward. Our objective is no longer simply to improve a single model, but to demonstrate that the process in itself is repeatable, scalable, and model agnostic. We view the commoditization of reasoning as vital to ensure our technology is not only transparent, but also co-owned by humanity.

Affine

14,866 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Larry Ellison just told every AI company on Earth they’re fighting the wrong war. The entire industry is racing to build the smartest model. More parameters. Better benchmarks. Faster inference. Ellison isn’t building a model. He’s controlling what every model needs to be useful. Every frontier AI trains on the same public internet. Same scraped pages. Same recycled text. When everyone has the same data, it’s not an advantage. It’s a floor. The only data that creates separation is private. Medical records. Financial models. Defense systems. Proprietary research locked behind firewalls for decades. That data already lives inside Oracle databases. Not Google’s. Not Microsoft’s. Not Amazon’s. Ellison didn’t enter the model war. He positioned himself above it. He rebuilt the database so AI can reason on private data without ever absorbing it. Training folds your data into the model permanently. Once it’s in, it never comes back out. Reasoning thinks with your data and hands back only the answer. The data never moves. One is surrender. The other is sovereignty. Ellison: “These are remarkable electronic brains.” He didn’t build the brain. He owns what the brain needs to think. Everyone is building the most powerful mind in human history. A mind is only as valuable as what it’s allowed to know. Own the knowledge and it doesn’t matter who builds the brain. That pattern has held through every era of human civilization. AI doesn’t break it. It proves it.

Larry Ellison just told every AI company on Earth they’re fighting the wrong war. The entire industry is racing to build the smartest model. More parameters. Better benchmarks. Faster inference. Ellison isn’t building a model. He’s controlling what every model needs to be useful. Every frontier AI trains on the same public internet. Same scraped pages. Same recycled text. When everyone has the same data, it’s not an advantage. It’s a floor. The only data that creates separation is private. Medical records. Financial models. Defense systems. Proprietary research locked behind firewalls for decades. That data already lives inside Oracle databases. Not Google’s. Not Microsoft’s. Not Amazon’s. Ellison didn’t enter the model war. He positioned himself above it. He rebuilt the database so AI can reason on private data without ever absorbing it. Training folds your data into the model permanently. Once it’s in, it never comes back out. Reasoning thinks with your data and hands back only the answer. The data never moves. One is surrender. The other is sovereignty. Ellison: “These are remarkable electronic brains.” He didn’t build the brain. He owns what the brain needs to think. Everyone is building the most powerful mind in human history. A mind is only as valuable as what it’s allowed to know. Own the knowledge and it doesn’t matter who builds the brain. That pattern has held through every era of human civilization. AI doesn’t break it. It proves it.

Dustin

98,131 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Gavin Baker says the future for the world's biggest companies is open models and private context: "I think the future is an ensemble of models. There's a Pareto curve. No one model is going to be the best at everything." "For the global 1,000 biggest companies, you're going to take whatever the best open-source model is. I think probably in the very near future, that's going to be an Nvidia model." "Everybody says 'Well, in a world where open-source wins, who funds the training?' Chip companies can fund the training." "It's trivial to do a $50 to $100 billion training run for Jensen, but I do think you're going to see American open-source led by Nvidia get really close to the frontier." "Sharing your own enterprise context, that's truly your IP, that's truly the value of your company, the context embedded in all of your data, sharing that with a frontier lab may be hazardous for your financial health." "I think what you'll see these companies do is they'll have their own model on their data, and it will work with one or two other frontier models, checking each other... I think that feels like a very likely future to me." Gavin Baker David George

Gavin Baker says the future for the world's biggest companies is open models and private context: "I think the future is an ensemble of models. There's a Pareto curve. No one model is going to be the best at everything." "For the global 1,000 biggest companies, you're going to take whatever the best open-source model is. I think probably in the very near future, that's going to be an Nvidia model." "Everybody says 'Well, in a world where open-source wins, who funds the training?' Chip companies can fund the training." "It's trivial to do a $50 to $100 billion training run for Jensen, but I do think you're going to see American open-source led by Nvidia get really close to the frontier." "Sharing your own enterprise context, that's truly your IP, that's truly the value of your company, the context embedded in all of your data, sharing that with a frontier lab may be hazardous for your financial health." "I think what you'll see these companies do is they'll have their own model on their data, and it will work with one or two other frontier models, checking each other... I think that feels like a very likely future to me." Gavin Baker David George

a16z

39,947 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

JUST IN: const shares the vision for gamma tokens, usage credits that subnets could fund from a slice of their emissions and spend on compute, inference, and other infrastructure. What this means ⬇️ → Subnets stop being isolated prize pools. They can buy services from one another instead of only competing for $TAO → Gamma is meant to work as a transferable credit, not just another speculative subnet token → Access is designed to reach beyond Bittensor, so outside compute and inference providers could take the same credits → Emissions become operating budget, not only a reward that gets sold into TAO If a subnet can spend what it earns on real work, Bittensor starts looking less like a scoreboard and more like an internal market for intelligence.

JUST IN: const shares the vision for gamma tokens, usage credits that subnets could fund from a slice of their emissions and spend on compute, inference, and other infrastructure. What this means ⬇️ → Subnets stop being isolated prize pools. They can buy services from one another instead of only competing for $TAO → Gamma is meant to work as a transferable credit, not just another speculative subnet token → Access is designed to reach beyond Bittensor, so outside compute and inference providers could take the same credits → Emissions become operating budget, not only a reward that gets sold into TAO If a subnet can spend what it earns on real work, Bittensor starts looking less like a scoreboard and more like an internal market for intelligence.

Intelligence ττ

75,768 просмотров • 14 дней назад

Small Language Models (SML) are the future of AI. "Small" (SML) instead of "Large" (LLM). These small models are highly specialized models with superhuman abilities on specific tasks. Here are two techniques to build these models: • Spectrum • Model Merging I give you a short introduction in the attached video, but here is a quick summary: Spectrum helps us identify the most relevant layers to solve one specific task. We can ignore everything else and focus on fine-tuning these layers. Using Spectrum, we can fine-tune models in a heartbeat. Model Merging combines multiple models into a unique, much better model than any of the individual input models. You can also combine models specialized in different tasks and get a model with multiple abilities. This is the state of the art of productizing models. It's what Arcee.ai's platform does behind the scenes. Arcee collaborated with me on this post and is sponsoring it. There are three main steps to produce a model for your particular use case: 1. You create a dataset by uploading your data. 2. You train a model. At this step, Arcee uses Spectrum and Model Merging to produce a highly specialized model for your task. 3. You can deploy that model to any environment you want. Three important notes: • Training process is 2x faster and 2x cheaper than regular fine-tuning. • Resultant models are smaller and have higher accuracy. • They create these specialized models from open-source models. Check this site so you can fully appreciate how this works: If you want to fine-tune an open-source model, consider Arcee's platform. This is the state of the art.

Small Language Models (SML) are the future of AI. "Small" (SML) instead of "Large" (LLM). These small models are highly specialized models with superhuman abilities on specific tasks. Here are two techniques to build these models: • Spectrum • Model Merging I give you a short introduction in the attached video, but here is a quick summary: Spectrum helps us identify the most relevant layers to solve one specific task. We can ignore everything else and focus on fine-tuning these layers. Using Spectrum, we can fine-tune models in a heartbeat. Model Merging combines multiple models into a unique, much better model than any of the individual input models. You can also combine models specialized in different tasks and get a model with multiple abilities. This is the state of the art of productizing models. It's what Arcee.ai's platform does behind the scenes. Arcee collaborated with me on this post and is sponsoring it. There are three main steps to produce a model for your particular use case: 1. You create a dataset by uploading your data. 2. You train a model. At this step, Arcee uses Spectrum and Model Merging to produce a highly specialized model for your task. 3. You can deploy that model to any environment you want. Three important notes: • Training process is 2x faster and 2x cheaper than regular fine-tuning. • Resultant models are smaller and have higher accuracy. • They create these specialized models from open-source models. Check this site so you can fully appreciate how this works: If you want to fine-tune an open-source model, consider Arcee's platform. This is the state of the art.

Santiago

164,162 просмотров • 2 лет назад