whatmodel.sh / decision / Fastino GLiDE 1.2

Fastino GLiDE 1.2

+ contribute

Fastino GLiDE 1.2 is an open-weights decision model from Fastino, released 22 October 2026. Its published size is 27.8B parameters. Licence: other.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine glide-v1.2; reported model Fastino GLiDE 1.2. Type: full fine-tune; technique: autoregressive. Published checkpoint/base reference: a7e45896be7c96ba3354891da790c5ec99c30b6c. Implementation: https://huggingface.co/fastino/GLiDE/tree/main/glide. Comparison entry; no current run command, API price or speed inferred from the benchmark. Current repository metadata checked separately; an unpinned alias is not evidence that today’s weights reproduce this historical run.

Model information sources

Release date ↗ · Weights licence ↗ · Parameter count ↗

Publisher parameter count; includes the served backbone, not just adapter size.

73.3±1.4#4 of 355 decision modelsfrom 54 benchmark results across 2 sources

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of Fastino GLiDE 1.2, out of 357 with a score, then more from Fastino.

#	model	score	where	released
2	baselabs mammoth-1 (27B) baselabs	75±1	model files	2026-10-21
3	Sieve 31B v3 Sthānika AI	74±2	model files	2026-10-27
4	Fastino GLiDE 1.2 Fastino	73±1	model files	2026-10-22
5	KnowLine 31B Gen1 PelaAI	73±2	model files	2026-10-24
6	Ainvest-Decision-27B v1.0 Ainvest-World	73±2	model files	2026-10-27
	more from Fastino
313	GLiNER2.5-Decide (DecisionBench 0872ab14) Fastino	30±2	model files
326	gliner2-large-v1 (DecisionBench f32ea6ef) Fastino	26±2	model files
336	GLiNER2.5-Decide Fastino	23±1	model files

see all decision models · find the ones that fit your machine

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #49 of 250 · 4.1% of its score · 6 tests

Trails baselabs joey-1 (2B), Solomon v1.1, Bespoke Nimble 9B v3 here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: API-Bank (accuracy) submitted	87.0% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▂█▂ beats 208/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	71.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▃ beats 240/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.0%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	91.6% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 235/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 0.7%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	100.0% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 230/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 0.6%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	97.3% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 193/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 0.5%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	79.6% ✎	no other model yet		—	failed run: Publisher excludes this protocol because its prompt reveals GPT-4 as the best route. Evidence: https://huggingface.co/spaces/multimodalart/jev-decision-index/blob/c130faf65f82e81d3bdefb01e758c712dc5c5199/data/index.json

retrieval & classification▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #21 of 258 · 7.2% of its score · 7 tests

Trails JEV-35B, StartLux-Decision v1.1 4B, Torchcast Decision 27B here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: BRIGHT (nDCG@10) submitted	48.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▄▇█ beats 208/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 3.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	61.5% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 225/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	89.0% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 230/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.5%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	85.9% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 193/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.5%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	92.0% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 213/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.2%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	95.9% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 219/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.2%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	67.3% ✎	no other model yet		—	failed run: Publisher reports a builder bug exposing dialogue turns after the classified turn; awaiting corrected rerun. Evidence: https://huggingface.co/spaces/multimodalart/jev-decision-index/blob/c130faf65f82e81d3bdefb01e758c712dc5c5199/data/index.json

language understanding▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #9 of 256 · 18% of its score · 9 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710, Sieve 31B v3 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Clef-omni, vLLM-SR d3 (27B), AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1 here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: ANLI (macro-F1) submitted	80.6% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▃····▁ beats 242/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 4.6%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	87.2% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 238/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 4.2%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	69.4% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 231/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.5%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	62.8% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 235/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.9%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	97.7% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 235/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 1.7%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	80.8% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 233/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 0.9%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	84.7% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 222/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 0.8%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	85.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 237/246	easy · avg 66%	▇ 0.6%	noisy

1 more test

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: FinEntity (macro-F1) submitted	94.3% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 220/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.4%	maxed out · noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▂▃▁ #9 of 247 · 9.0% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails AnyJev Tacitus 31B, baselabs elephant-1 (9B), vera-large here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: New Yorker (accuracy) submitted	83.0% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 234/246	medium · avg 61%	▇ 3.3%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	68.6% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▃▁▁ beats 234/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.3%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	66.3% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 213/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.3%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	79.3% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 216/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.1%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	98.4% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▃▁▁ beats 238/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.6%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	64.4% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 235/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▃ #9 of 263 · 35% of its score · 14 tests

Trails Jev 1.13, d1-ultra, Perplexity Decider v1.1 (27B) here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU-Pro (accuracy) submitted	78.0% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▃ beats 243/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇ 9.3%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	93.0% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▃▁ beats 241/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 4.6%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	88.4% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 231/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇ 4.2%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	58.2% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 242/246	medium · avg 39%	▇▇ 4.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	85.3% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 235/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.0%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	44.9% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▃▁ beats 236/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 2.2%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	94.6% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 230/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: MuSR (accuracy) submitted	76.2% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▃▁▁▁▁ beats 232/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.3%	blunt · at its level

6 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	25.1% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 223/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 1.1%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	83.2% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 207/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	97.2% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 206/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 0.9%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	92.9% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▃▁▁▁ beats 231/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 0.8%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	99.0% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 194/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	18.2% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▃▁ beats 241/246	very hard · avg 13%	▇ 0.0%	blunt

vision▁·▃▂▃▃▇▄▄█▄▃ #15 of 79 · 16% of its score · 12 tests

Trails Clef-flash, Mercury Decide (free endpoint), Clef here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · Mind2Web (chance-corrected points) submitted	82.7300 points ✎	▁·▁▁▃▁▄▄▃▅█▂ beats 43/61	avg 63.423 points	▇ 2.0%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · MMMU-Pro vision (chance-corrected points) submitted	48.5500 points ✎	▁▁▅▁▄▁▄█▄▃▇▇ beats 61/61	avg 22.797 points	▇ 1.9%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · Winoground (chance-corrected points) submitted	87.2500 points ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁·▂▁▃▅█ beats 60/61	avg 66.987 points	▇ 1.7%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4: private same skills (points)	67.5400 points ✎	▁▁▃▃▁▂▄▆▃▃▅█ beats 53/61	avg 48.067 points	▇ 1.7%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · Moderation (Hateful Memes) (chance-corrected points) submitted	42.9500 points ✎	▆▃▃▆▄▄▇██▁▆▆ beats 44/61	avg 28.443 points	▇ 1.5%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · RealWorldQA (chance-corrected points) submitted	71.9800 points ✎	▁·▂▂▁▃▃▅▅▃▂█ beats 47/61	avg 53.651 points	▇ 1.3%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · CharXiv (chance-corrected points) submitted	83.2100 points ✎	▂▁▁▁▁▃▁▅▅▆██ beats 59/61	avg 62.137 points	▇ 1.3%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · InfographicVQA (chance-corrected points) submitted	97.8100 points ✎	▁·▁▂▁▁▃▁▂▂▅█ beats 52/61	avg 83.859 points	▇ 1.0%	blunt

4 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · R-Bench-M (chance-corrected points) submitted	56.1400 points ✎	▂▄▇▆█▄▄▇▂··▃ beats 61/61	avg 19.676 points	▇ 1.0%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · BLINK (chance-corrected points) submitted	59.5700 points ✎	▁···▁▂▂▂█▄▂▃ beats 43/61	avg 44.994 points	▇ 1.0%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · CV-Bench (chance-corrected points) submitted	76.5300 points ✎	▁▁▁▁▂▁▁▁▄█▃▃ beats 45/61	avg 67.662 points	▇ 0.8%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · KIE (CORD+FUNSD) (chance-corrected points) submitted	92.6500 points ✎	▁··▁▁▁▁▁▂▄█▁ beats 50/61	avg 85.184 points	▇ 0.6%	blunt

other tests2 not in a task · 11% of its score

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: private same skills (equated points)	68.3100 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 247/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇▇ 6.8%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	76.3200 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 244/247	avg 38.861 points	▇▇ 3.8%	blunt

$ where to run it

Download model files ↗
Published model files verified. This is the revision recorded by the benchmark. A local run command and hardware requirements have not been verified for this entry. Source · checked 2026-10-31.

Model repository and documentation: huggingface.co/fastino ↗

$ how the score was worked out · Decision Index 0.4.1 83%, Decision Index Vision 0.4 16%

Each result implies a score on its own, after adjusting for how hard its test is and who ran it. The score is their weighted average, with a small pull toward the middle for thinly tested models. Each test's weight is its counts column above; here it's added up by who ran the tests. How it works

source	results	share of the score	licence
Decision Index 0.4.1 · submitted; independent execution unverified	42	▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 83%	CC BY 4.0
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · submitted; independent execution unverified	12	▇▇▇▇▇ 16%	CC BY 4.0
prior · pull toward the middle		▇ 1%
weighted average		= 73.3

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	79.6%	failed run: Publisher excludes this protocol because its prompt reveals GPT-4 as the best route. Evidence: https://huggingface.co/spaces/multimodalart/jev-decision-index/blob/c130faf65f82e81d3bdefb01e758c712dc5c5199/data/index.json
Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) [correct]	67.3%	failed run: Publisher reports a builder bug exposing dialogue turns after the classified turn; awaiting corrected rerun. Evidence: https://huggingface.co/spaces/multimodalart/jev-decision-index/blob/c130faf65f82e81d3bdefb01e758c712dc5c5199/data/index.json

$ improve this page

Update model information Add a place to run it Add a test result Propose a benchmark Correct a benchmark score Edit data on GitHub

Use a short GitHub form or edit the data through a pull request. Every number needs a source; here's which ones we can use.

data updated 2026-11-03 02:37 UTC · sources and licences · json