Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

You can now classify documents with open-weight VLMs at ultra-low cost with our TypeSafe AI Jev-compatible API in the VLM Run gateway! $1 buys you 6700+ pages, and the full 1,651-page OmniDocBench run cost 25 cents. It reads the page as pixels (no OCR->LLM hacks) and hands back one...

spillai's profile picture

Sudeep Pillai

2,877 subscribers

19,735 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Built a tax document classifier with Jev. We ingest thousands of tax documents using an LLM pipeline I built last tax season. I read multiple articles as late as April this year claiming AI fails at tax document classification. Wasn't the case back then, and it's proved wrong again now. Jev classifies 100% of our tax document corpus at $0.001 per page. 34x cheaper and 6x faster than the LLM setup. Open sourcing it:
0:12

Built a tax document classifier with Jev. We ingest thousands of tax documents using an LLM pipeline I built last tax season. I read multiple articles as late as April this year claiming AI fails at tax document classification. Wasn't the case back then, and it's proved wrong again now. Jev classifies 100% of our tax document corpus at $0.001 per page. 34x cheaper and 6x faster than the LLM setup. Open sourcing it:

Nakshatra Saxena

245,382 görüntüleme • 13 gün önce

Jev + Kimi K3 for fraud detection! TLDR: Jev classified 100 emails in 1.42 seconds, then I routed the uncertain cases to Kimi K3. The full pipeline got 96/100 correct for only ~$0.07. Video is not sped up, check out the live run! Here was my process: I gave Jev 100 emails to classify (a mix of 50 legit & 50 fraudelent emails). It classified all of them in 1.42 seconds. An underrated feature about Jev is it will give you the confidence score for a classification, so I routed any prediction under 95% confidence to Kimi K3 to be fully sure. 31 emails fell below that threshold. After routing those to Kimi K3, the combined pipeline reached 96% accuracy. The full run took 16 seconds & ~$0.07 in inference costs: - $0.068 from Kimi K3 on Together AI - $0.003 (1/3 of a cent) from Jev on TypeSafe AI. I think this is a really interesting pattern: use a fast specialized model like Jev for the narrow task, then route the uncertain cases to a larger LLM. I feel like this kind of approach could be a game changer for use cases like fraud or anything realtime. You can use the speed & low cost of Jev while having a larger LLM as a fallback to ensure high accuracy.
0:12

Jev + Kimi K3 for fraud detection! TLDR: Jev classified 100 emails in 1.42 seconds, then I routed the uncertain cases to Kimi K3. The full pipeline got 96/100 correct for only ~$0.07. Video is not sped up, check out the live run! Here was my process: I gave Jev 100 emails to classify (a mix of 50 legit & 50 fraudelent emails). It classified all of them in 1.42 seconds. An underrated feature about Jev is it will give you the confidence score for a classification, so I routed any prediction under 95% confidence to Kimi K3 to be fully sure. 31 emails fell below that threshold. After routing those to Kimi K3, the combined pipeline reached 96% accuracy. The full run took 16 seconds & ~$0.07 in inference costs: - $0.068 from Kimi K3 on Together AI - $0.003 (1/3 of a cent) from Jev on TypeSafe AI. I think this is a really interesting pattern: use a fast specialized model like Jev for the narrow task, then route the uncertain cases to a larger LLM. I feel like this kind of approach could be a game changer for use cases like fraud or anything realtime. You can use the speed & low cost of Jev while having a larger LLM as a fallback to ensure high accuracy.

Hassan

60,369 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

1-bit Kimi K3 performs at Opus 5 level on 3D physics! We ran our Atomic Chat quant of Kimi K3 locally on 4x B200 against three cloud models and gave them all the same task, to build a giant anvil drop test as a single HTML file with real physics Outputs: K3 1bit (local): 15.8K tokens, $0 API cost Kimi K3 (API): 15.3K tokens, $0.30 API cost Opus 5: 22.8K tokens, $0.77 API cost GPT 5.6: 14.5K tokens, $0.72 API cost All four got the physics right. But only Kimi made a working winch. The drum turns and the chain drags the flat car off the pad. Opus 5 drew the most detail, road markings and sparks on the hit. And you can run a model at this level on your own box now. That still feels insane to us
0:15

1-bit Kimi K3 performs at Opus 5 level on 3D physics! We ran our Atomic Chat quant of Kimi K3 locally on 4x B200 against three cloud models and gave them all the same task, to build a giant anvil drop test as a single HTML file with real physics Outputs: K3 1bit (local): 15.8K tokens, $0 API cost Kimi K3 (API): 15.3K tokens, $0.30 API cost Opus 5: 22.8K tokens, $0.77 API cost GPT 5.6: 14.5K tokens, $0.72 API cost All four got the physics right. But only Kimi made a working winch. The drum turns and the chain drags the flat car off the pad. Opus 5 drew the most detail, road markings and sparks on the hit. And you can run a model at this level on your own box now. That still feels insane to us

atomic.chat

53,845 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Jev + SERV is actually insane. We already showed you can increase Jev's performance with SERV Reasoning. Now we're taking it further, bringing Jev-powered Decision nodes into Graph Sharding with the upcoming SERV v3. Here's a breakdown of how it works: Jev is a decision-making model. Given a task and a set of options, it predicts which path is more likely. Think of the octopus that predicted World Cup results. Jev does that for your business, except it's not luck. It weighs every option and tells you how sure it is. It does this by assigning probabilities to outcomes. It doesn't generate text on its own, so you can't expect it to create a new outcome for you. But that's also what enables it to be lightning fast and dirt cheap. For example, in customer service you can ask Jev how to triage an incoming query and route it to the correct department. It can only select from the list of departments you provide it. This also means it can't hallucinate a new outcome outside the options it's given, which makes it incredibly interesting for OpenServ. In Graph Sharding, we take a single system prompt and break it down into multiple LLM steps with deterministic input and output shapes. Some of these steps require an LLM to produce new output, while others are simply decision routers that determine the next possible path. Traditionally, LLMs are slow and expensive. Breaking a single prompt into multiple steps increases accuracy and reliability by a ton, but it also introduces latency. Jev takes on those decision nodes, which are the backbone of a business process and therefore SERV graphs, and makes them super consistent and lightning fast, lowering the overall cost and latency of graph execution. SERV Reasoning on its own is a great force multiplier for Jev because, like all other models, it works by interpreting input instructions. The clearer those instructions are, the better the model performs. That's where SERV Reasoning comes into play. Just like amplifying any other model, we also amplify the accuracy and consistency of Jev's responses. And now we're bringing Jev-powered Decision nodes into Graph Sharding with SERV v3.
0:13

Jev + SERV is actually insane. We already showed you can increase Jev's performance with SERV Reasoning. Now we're taking it further, bringing Jev-powered Decision nodes into Graph Sharding with the upcoming SERV v3. Here's a breakdown of how it works: Jev is a decision-making model. Given a task and a set of options, it predicts which path is more likely. Think of the octopus that predicted World Cup results. Jev does that for your business, except it's not luck. It weighs every option and tells you how sure it is. It does this by assigning probabilities to outcomes. It doesn't generate text on its own, so you can't expect it to create a new outcome for you. But that's also what enables it to be lightning fast and dirt cheap. For example, in customer service you can ask Jev how to triage an incoming query and route it to the correct department. It can only select from the list of departments you provide it. This also means it can't hallucinate a new outcome outside the options it's given, which makes it incredibly interesting for OpenServ. In Graph Sharding, we take a single system prompt and break it down into multiple LLM steps with deterministic input and output shapes. Some of these steps require an LLM to produce new output, while others are simply decision routers that determine the next possible path. Traditionally, LLMs are slow and expensive. Breaking a single prompt into multiple steps increases accuracy and reliability by a ton, but it also introduces latency. Jev takes on those decision nodes, which are the backbone of a business process and therefore SERV graphs, and makes them super consistent and lightning fast, lowering the overall cost and latency of graph execution. SERV Reasoning on its own is a great force multiplier for Jev because, like all other models, it works by interpreting input instructions. The clearer those instructions are, the better the model performs. That's where SERV Reasoning comes into play. Just like amplifying any other model, we also amplify the accuracy and consistency of Jev's responses. And now we're bringing Jev-powered Decision nodes into Graph Sharding with SERV v3.

Armagan Amcalar

365,108 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

“If you want satellites that can confidently spot really tiny wildfires, you can build a really big, expensive, high-resolution satellite that stares at the ground for a long time. Or you use smaller, lower-cost satellites — meaning you can launch a lot more of them — but you have to make up the precision difference with machine learning and AI. We chose the latter,” says Google Research scientist, Chris Van Arsdale. We spoke with Chris about our FireSat initiative and how we’re using AI to detect and track wildfires.
0:17

“If you want satellites that can confidently spot really tiny wildfires, you can build a really big, expensive, high-resolution satellite that stares at the ground for a long time. Or you use smaller, lower-cost satellites — meaning you can launch a lot more of them — but you have to make up the precision difference with machine learning and AI. We chose the latter,” says Google Research scientist, Chris Van Arsdale. We spoke with Chris about our FireSat initiative and how we’re using AI to detect and track wildfires.

Google

188,667 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

⚡🇦🇺 The Sons are heading out tonight for another flag run! 🇦🇺⚡ It’s been a week since I’ve banged an Aussie flag up on the streets, and mate… I’m keen as mustard to smash a Guinness, spark a Winnie Blue, and catch up with me best mates. That’s living the Aussie dream, mate. Australia's sons And that could be you. You can jump in with us anytime. Say g’day in our Telegram vetting page and get connected. We’re bringing back Australia 🇦🇺
0:11

⚡🇦🇺 The Sons are heading out tonight for another flag run! 🇦🇺⚡ It’s been a week since I’ve banged an Aussie flag up on the streets, and mate… I’m keen as mustard to smash a Guinness, spark a Winnie Blue, and catch up with me best mates. That’s living the Aussie dream, mate. Australia's sons And that could be you. You can jump in with us anytime. Say g’day in our Telegram vetting page and get connected. We’re bringing back Australia 🇦🇺

Australia’s Sons

24,025 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

Seedance 2.5 tends to pick up more natural movement and follow 3D blockouts more closely—but sometimes the results are nearly 1:1 with MiniMax. MiniMax ran at a fraction of the credit cost in this Comfy Cloud test, or can be run locally for free. Both have their place. It comes down to the use case, the results you need, and how much room you have to iterate. To try this workflow, link below 👇
0:14

Seedance 2.5 tends to pick up more natural movement and follow 3D blockouts more closely—but sometimes the results are nearly 1:1 with MiniMax. MiniMax ran at a fraction of the credit cost in this Comfy Cloud test, or can be run locally for free. Both have their place. It comes down to the use case, the results you need, and how much room you have to iterate. To try this workflow, link below 👇

ComfyUI

33,089 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Opus 5.5 + GrokBot + Jev... I can't believe that I build it I packed the best of AI into ONE agent - now 99% of people’s AI agents look dumb, slow, and expensive Try here (free): prompt → GrokBot → Jev chooses LLM → Claude / GPT working on GrokBot's computer 24/7 → result → Jev sends only the tasks Grok is weak at to Opus or GPT → Jev picks the best model for each task - for example, Claude for motion design and Codex for web design → runs on the ChatGPT and Claude subscriptions you already pay for (API also work) → works on GrokBot computer while you keep chatting → checks every result against the goal before you see it → GrokBot gets smarter and cheaper at the same time → And plenty more features in a bot everyone will call "obvious" by 2030 Try Jevopus, thank me later - then read the article on the full Jev architecture ↓
0:14

Opus 5.5 + GrokBot + Jev... I can't believe that I build it I packed the best of AI into ONE agent - now 99% of people’s AI agents look dumb, slow, and expensive Try here (free): prompt → GrokBot → Jev chooses LLM → Claude / GPT working on GrokBot's computer 24/7 → result → Jev sends only the tasks Grok is weak at to Opus or GPT → Jev picks the best model for each task - for example, Claude for motion design and Codex for web design → runs on the ChatGPT and Claude subscriptions you already pay for (API also work) → works on GrokBot computer while you keep chatting → checks every result against the goal before you see it → GrokBot gets smarter and cheaper at the same time → And plenty more features in a bot everyone will call "obvious" by 2030 Try Jevopus, thank me later - then read the article on the full Jev architecture ↓

codila

254,695 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce

We are releasing AutoResearchExam, a benchmark on open-ended machine learning and engineering tasks. Our benchmark covers seven research areas including model training, data curation, AI safety and interpretability. In each task, we give agents 24 hours with a CPU or GPU machine to develop and improve their solutions through experiments and feedback. We measure both speed and quality with a combined score. Our benchmark has a unique feature: testing if agents create improvements that hold up on data they never see. We find that AI research agents often overfit as they try to improve. We see an interesting head-to-head comparison at the frontier: Astra starts the strongest and holds the lead for up to 19 hours but Fable 5.1 catches up and gets the top performing spot in the final hours. Qwen3.8 Max, Gemini 3.8 Flash and Grok 4.6 all sit on the cost-performance Pareto frontier, giving strong options at lower API budgets. Anthropic's Opus and Fable retain nearly all their validation performance on hidden tests, with gaps of 1.1% and 2.9%. Astra's improvement over Sol extends to generalization too, with that gap falling from 6.9% to 1.7%. (1/n)
0:14

We are releasing AutoResearchExam, a benchmark on open-ended machine learning and engineering tasks. Our benchmark covers seven research areas including model training, data curation, AI safety and interpretability. In each task, we give agents 24 hours with a CPU or GPU machine to develop and improve their solutions through experiments and feedback. We measure both speed and quality with a combined score. Our benchmark has a unique feature: testing if agents create improvements that hold up on data they never see. We find that AI research agents often overfit as they try to improve. We see an interesting head-to-head comparison at the frontier: Astra starts the strongest and holds the lead for up to 19 hours but Fable 5.1 catches up and gets the top performing spot in the final hours. Qwen3.8 Max, Gemini 3.8 Flash and Grok 4.6 all sit on the cost-performance Pareto frontier, giving strong options at lower API budgets. Anthropic's Opus and Fable retain nearly all their validation performance on hidden tests, with gaps of 1.1% and 2.9%. Astra's improvement over Sol extends to generalization too, with that gap falling from 6.9% to 1.7%. (1/n)

Alex Dimakis

2,032,014 görüntüleme • 22 gün önce

You can now use Jev right inside Claude Code 🤯 It's called jev-model-router, an early access mod built on Claude Code's new function hooks. Before every turn, it checks in with Jev and asks: > how mechanical the task is > how much reasoning it needs > whether it's risky Then it routes: → it'll move up to a stronger model on weak evidence, and only drops to a cheaper one when it's confident the task is simple → every decision gets logged in your transcript → if the call fails, your request runs untouched Setup: 1. copy the install command: npx claude-code-templates@latest --mod productivity/jev-model-router 2. paste it inside Claude Code 3. run claude with CLAUDE_CODE_ENABLE_FUNCTION_HOOKS=1 set 4. accept the trust prompt on first launch Link: Also works with no api key, it just falls back to a built-in classifier with no confidence score. For real jev routing, add your typesafeApiKey or gatewayApiKey to ~/.claude/settings.json. Follow me for more AI workflows and tutorials.
0:15

You can now use Jev right inside Claude Code 🤯 It's called jev-model-router, an early access mod built on Claude Code's new function hooks. Before every turn, it checks in with Jev and asks: > how mechanical the task is > how much reasoning it needs > whether it's risky Then it routes: → it'll move up to a stronger model on weak evidence, and only drops to a cheaper one when it's confident the task is simple → every decision gets logged in your transcript → if the call fails, your request runs untouched Setup: 1. copy the install command: npx claude-code-templates@latest --mod productivity/jev-model-router 2. paste it inside Claude Code 3. run claude with CLAUDE_CODE_ENABLE_FUNCTION_HOOKS=1 set 4. accept the trust prompt on first launch Link: Also works with no api key, it just falls back to a built-in classifier with no confidence score. For real jev routing, add your typesafeApiKey or gatewayApiKey to ~/.claude/settings.json. Follow me for more AI workflows and tutorials.

Alvaro Cintas

42,484 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce

holy sh*t. Jev's founder Diogo Almeida dropped a Google Doc on coding agents one of these PDFs has the map everyone needs: where Jev sits in an agent loop ↓ agents do the work, Jev makes the calls, the LLM only writes: 1 → task in: one Noul before anything runs. in scope, or does a human need to see it first? 2 → dispatch: a Choice picks who takes the step (research, write or review). act at 0.85+, everything below goes to review 3 → act: Jev gates the tool call (allow, confirm or block). the LLM only writes the arguments 4 → check: a Score decides what comes back (drop, summary or keep). whatever Jev is unsure of goes to a human 5 → finish: Jev says done above 0.8, then code proves the file actually exists the LLM shows up in 2 of 5 stages. everything else is a typed answer, plain code or a person. don't refactor your agent. hand Jev the one fork it hits most (usually the tool gate or dispatch) and watch 3 numbers for a week: cost per completed task, time per completed task, and how often escalation fired and whether it was right. if escalation never fires, the threshold is too loose and your agent is quietly running unsupervised.
0:18

holy sh*t. Jev's founder Diogo Almeida dropped a Google Doc on coding agents one of these PDFs has the map everyone needs: where Jev sits in an agent loop ↓ agents do the work, Jev makes the calls, the LLM only writes: 1 → task in: one Noul before anything runs. in scope, or does a human need to see it first? 2 → dispatch: a Choice picks who takes the step (research, write or review). act at 0.85+, everything below goes to review 3 → act: Jev gates the tool call (allow, confirm or block). the LLM only writes the arguments 4 → check: a Score decides what comes back (drop, summary or keep). whatever Jev is unsure of goes to a human 5 → finish: Jev says done above 0.8, then code proves the file actually exists the LLM shows up in 2 of 5 stages. everything else is a typed answer, plain code or a person. don't refactor your agent. hand Jev the one fork it hits most (usually the tool gate or dispatch) and watch 3 numbers for a week: cost per completed task, time per completed task, and how often escalation fired and whether it was right. if escalation never fires, the threshold is too loose and your agent is quietly running unsupervised.

Archive

31,914 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce

Unpopular opinion: Most agent evals are theatre. You run them once before the deployment. It'll take 800ms+ as another LLM would be judging your LLM. Most annoying part - no one tells where in the chain things went wrong. I wasted a lot of time in this loop. And then I came across Future AGI bringing 5 different tools under one umbrella, best part - the platform is completely open source. They open sourced their entire platform and the eval layer is noticeably different. It is multimodal - works on everything text, image, audio, pdf. Not an LLM-as-judge adding latency but an agent with memory and tools. The biggest win are learned classifiers trained on actual production failure patterns to run evals at low cost. It also runs across the full reasoning chain, not just the final response. Check out → Try it here →
0:13

Unpopular opinion: Most agent evals are theatre. You run them once before the deployment. It'll take 800ms+ as another LLM would be judging your LLM. Most annoying part - no one tells where in the chain things went wrong. I wasted a lot of time in this loop. And then I came across Future AGI bringing 5 different tools under one umbrella, best part - the platform is completely open source. They open sourced their entire platform and the eval layer is noticeably different. It is multimodal - works on everything text, image, audio, pdf. Not an LLM-as-judge adding latency but an agent with memory and tools. The biggest win are learned classifiers trained on actual production failure patterns to run evals at low cost. It also runs across the full reasoning chain, not just the final response. Check out → Try it here →

Swapna Kumar Panda

50,358 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Today we're dropping the "beta" tag from Adaptyv, launching our new website and announcing our $8M seed round. When we started Adaptyv a few years ago, our core belief was: AI models for biology are only as good as the experimental data they're trained on and the hypotheses they can test in the real world. Now, after a year of working with many great partners, we’ve scaled our infrastructure to the point that we're now open to anyone who wants to use our platform! Overall, this year, over 30 companies started using Adaptyv to validate their protein designs - from some of the biggest pharmas to frontier AI labs to many, many techbio startups. We've run hundreds of experiments, tested well over 10,000 proteins this year and are generating the data that validates the best AI models currently in development.
0:11

Today we're dropping the "beta" tag from Adaptyv, launching our new website and announcing our $8M seed round. When we started Adaptyv a few years ago, our core belief was: AI models for biology are only as good as the experimental data they're trained on and the hypotheses they can test in the real world. Now, after a year of working with many great partners, we’ve scaled our infrastructure to the point that we're now open to anyone who wants to use our platform! Overall, this year, over 30 companies started using Adaptyv to validate their protein designs - from some of the biggest pharmas to frontier AI labs to many, many techbio startups. We've run hundreds of experiments, tested well over 10,000 proteins this year and are generating the data that validates the best AI models currently in development.

Adaptyv Bio

11,484 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

A peanut-sized Chinese model just dethroned Gemini at reading documents. GLM-OCR is a 0.9B parameter vision-language model. It scores 94.62 on OmniDocBench V1.5, ranking #1 overall. For context, it outperforms models 100x its size. 100% open-source. It works in two stages. 1. A layout engine detects every region in a document. 2. Each region gets read in parallel. The model predicts multiple tokens per step instead of one. That's what makes it so fast at small size. It handles things most OCR tools struggle with: > Complex tables and nested layouts > Handwritten text and stamps > Math formulas and code blocks > Mixed image-and-text documents You can run it locally through Ollama. It fits on edge devices with limited compute. Every expensive OCR API just got a free competitor.
0:15

A peanut-sized Chinese model just dethroned Gemini at reading documents. GLM-OCR is a 0.9B parameter vision-language model. It scores 94.62 on OmniDocBench V1.5, ranking #1 overall. For context, it outperforms models 100x its size. 100% open-source. It works in two stages. 1. A layout engine detects every region in a document. 2. Each region gets read in parallel. The model predicts multiple tokens per step instead of one. That's what makes it so fast at small size. It handles things most OCR tools struggle with: > Complex tables and nested layouts > Handwritten text and stamps > Math formulas and code blocks > Mixed image-and-text documents You can run it locally through Ollama. It fits on edge devices with limited compute. Every expensive OCR API just got a free competitor.

AlphaSignal

92,137 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

A peanut-sized Chinese model just dethroned Gemini at reading documents. GLM-OCR is a 0.9B parameter vision-language model. It scores 94.62 on OmniDocBench V1.5, ranking #1 overall. For context, it outperforms models 100x its size. 100% open-source. It works in two stages. 1. A layout engine detects every region in a document. 2. Each region gets read in parallel. The model predicts multiple tokens per step instead of one. That's what makes it so fast at small size. It handles things most OCR tools struggle with: > Complex tables and nested layouts > Handwritten text and stamps > Math formulas and code blocks > Mixed image-and-text documents You can run it locally through Ollama. It fits on edge devices with limited compute. Every expensive OCR API just got a free competitor.
0:15

A peanut-sized Chinese model just dethroned Gemini at reading documents. GLM-OCR is a 0.9B parameter vision-language model. It scores 94.62 on OmniDocBench V1.5, ranking #1 overall. For context, it outperforms models 100x its size. 100% open-source. It works in two stages. 1. A layout engine detects every region in a document. 2. Each region gets read in parallel. The model predicts multiple tokens per step instead of one. That's what makes it so fast at small size. It handles things most OCR tools struggle with: > Complex tables and nested layouts > Handwritten text and stamps > Math formulas and code blocks > Mixed image-and-text documents You can run it locally through Ollama. It fits on edge devices with limited compute. Every expensive OCR API just got a free competitor.

Jafar Najafov

13,630 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

AI builders rely on a cloud that moves at their pace. Today, IREN takes another step forward with the completion of our acquisition of Mirantis. By bringing together IREN’s owned and operated data centers and compute with Mirantis’ flexible, interoperable software layer, we’re giving customers greater choice and control in how they deploy and scale AI workloads. Developers and enterprises want flexibility as the AI landscape evolves. We're building an open foundation that grows with you, so you’re ready for what's next. Read more:
0:19

AI builders rely on a cloud that moves at their pace. Today, IREN takes another step forward with the completion of our acquisition of Mirantis. By bringing together IREN’s owned and operated data centers and compute with Mirantis’ flexible, interoperable software layer, we’re giving customers greater choice and control in how they deploy and scale AI workloads. Developers and enterprises want flexibility as the AI landscape evolves. We're building an open foundation that grows with you, so you’re ready for what's next. Read more:

IREN

281,685 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Monitor and control your AI spend on every provider on Our early users save 40% on average. Every week, the price-intelligence-latency frontier shifts, and we expect this trend to continue. Tradeoffs between latency, reasoning, cost, service tier, open source and closed source models are shifting constantly. Router sends every request to the model that's actually best for the task and helps you control what tokens you buy. We benchmark it against real work: ~40% lower cost for the same outputs. Today we're opening it to everyone. Two lines of code or just change your base URL. No Ramp account needed. Free through 2026, first $26 on us. Get an API key today at
0:20

Monitor and control your AI spend on every provider on Our early users save 40% on average. Every week, the price-intelligence-latency frontier shifts, and we expect this trend to continue. Tradeoffs between latency, reasoning, cost, service tier, open source and closed source models are shifting constantly. Router sends every request to the model that's actually best for the task and helps you control what tokens you buy. We benchmark it against real work: ~40% lower cost for the same outputs. Today we're opening it to everyone. Two lines of code or just change your base URL. No Ramp account needed. Free through 2026, first $26 on us. Get an API key today at

Veeral Patel

1,427,131 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Found a great production use case for Jev. I used Jev to organize ~2.3K AI research papers. The total cost was $0.14, and it took about 83 seconds. The process: The papers already had old tags, which I ran through a previous open model (DeepSeek V4 Flash). However, I wasn't confident in the classifications, and I didn't want to spend more on tokens unless I spent time tuning it into a good LLM classifier via few-shot (more expensive). Too tedious, too costly, and unsustainable. Luckily for us, we now have Jev to help us with organizing papers better. So Jev first went through all the papers and retagged them. It agreed with 75% of the previous tags. Jev found about 579 high-confidence topic changes. I evaluated reliability by manually labeling 30 disagreements and accepted all of them. I was astonished by Jev's classification capabilities. We applied and verified all changes in production. I'm much more satisfied with the classifications, but I think there is still room for improvement. Check out the papers here: I will experiment with Jev more. The takeaway is that pipelines can be significantly improved by carefully combining System One and System Two models. Jev clearly unlocks more interesting ways to organize papers and offer a more useful discovery layer for research papers. More updates on that soon.
0:13

Found a great production use case for Jev. I used Jev to organize ~2.3K AI research papers. The total cost was $0.14, and it took about 83 seconds. The process: The papers already had old tags, which I ran through a previous open model (DeepSeek V4 Flash). However, I wasn't confident in the classifications, and I didn't want to spend more on tokens unless I spent time tuning it into a good LLM classifier via few-shot (more expensive). Too tedious, too costly, and unsustainable. Luckily for us, we now have Jev to help us with organizing papers better. So Jev first went through all the papers and retagged them. It agreed with 75% of the previous tags. Jev found about 579 high-confidence topic changes. I evaluated reliability by manually labeling 30 disagreements and accepted all of them. I was astonished by Jev's classification capabilities. We applied and verified all changes in production. I'm much more satisfied with the classifications, but I think there is still room for improvement. Check out the papers here: I will experiment with Jev more. The takeaway is that pipelines can be significantly improved by carefully combining System One and System Two models. Jev clearly unlocks more interesting ways to organize papers and offer a more useful discovery layer for research papers. More updates on that soon.

elvis

15,427 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce