whatmodel.sh / decision / MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B)

MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B)

+ contribute

MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B) is an open-weights decision model from MISA JSC. Its published size is 31.27B parameters. Licence: cc-by-nc-4.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine oak-1.1; reported model MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B). Type: full fine-tune; technique: autoregressive. 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

· Weights licence ↗ · Parameter count ↗

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

69.6±1.5#19 of 355 decision modelsfrom 42 benchmark results across 1 source

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B), out of 357 with a score.

#	model	score	where	released
17	Perplexity Decider v1.2 (27B) Perplexity	70±1	model files
18	AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1 AutoTrust AI Lab	70±1	model files	2026-10-17
19	MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (31B) MISA JSC	70±2	model files
20	vera-large scar-ai	70±2	model files
21	d1-ultra Liquid AI	69±2	api price unknown	2026-10-15

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #13 of 250 · 5.4% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710, Sieve 31B v3, Fastino GLiDE 1.2 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Clef-flash, Clef-omni, deck31b (Gemma 4 31B) (decision readout) 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	85.4% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▂█▂ beats 173/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 1.6%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	66.7% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▁ beats 180/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	95.5% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▃▁▃ beats 212/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 0.9%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	90.2% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 219/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 0.9%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	98.0% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 231/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 0.8%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	79.8% ✎	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▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #49 of 258 · 8.1% of its score · 7 tests

Beats H2O Lightning 31B v1.1, AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails StartLux-Decision v1.1 0.8B, Standard One 8B SH (v4), StartLux-Decision v1.1 2B 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	49.4% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▄▇█ beats 224/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 3.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	58.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 196/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.9%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	85.2% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 186/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.6%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	90.0% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▃▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 213/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.6%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	90.5% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 189/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	96.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 223/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	46.1% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #64 of 256 · 21% of its score · 9 tests

Beats Turion Jev 31B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Decider 35B-A3B, Sieve 9B v2, Clef-flash 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	76.1% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 206/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 5.5%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	85.2% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 216/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 5.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	78.5% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 246/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.9%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	94.5% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 186/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 2.5%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	41.4% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 205/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 2.0%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	82.6% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 244/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 1.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	81.5% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 176/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	82.4% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 204/246	easy · avg 66%	▇ 0.7%	noisy

1 more test

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: FinEntity (macro-F1) submitted	89.8% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 143/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.5%	maxed out · noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▃▁▁ #18 of 247 · 10% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710, KnowLine 31B Gen1, vLLM-SR d3-turbo v1.1 (27B) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Senova-4B v2, AnyJev L0 · Gemma-4-31B (decision readout), RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto) 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	79.4% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 212/246	medium · avg 61%	▇▇ 4.0%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	69.5% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▃▁▁ beats 242/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.5%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	65.5% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 192/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	81.3% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 225/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.4%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	97.6% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 229/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.8%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	48.4% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 169/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #23 of 263 · 42% of its score · 14 tests

Beats KnowLine 35B-A3B Gen1.5, Bespoke Nimble v4 Max (27B) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails d1 (hosted), Jev 1.13, Matilda Decision v1 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	73.4% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 233/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇ 11%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	82.2% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 202/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 5.7%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	88.1% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 224/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇ 5.5%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	54.6% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 227/246	medium · avg 39%	▇▇ 4.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	87.3% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 238/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	93.3% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 219/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.6%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	32.9% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 184/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 2.4%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MuSR (accuracy) submitted	66.2% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 191/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.5%	blunt · at its level

6 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	97.6% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 227/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 1.5%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	88.8% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 236/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.2%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	23.5% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 209/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 1.1%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	83.3% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 193/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	99.3% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 230/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 0.6%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	11.0% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 61/246	very hard · avg 13%	▇ 0.0%	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)	62.2200 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 223/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇▇ 7.4%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	75.7300 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 243/247	avg 38.861 points	▇▇ 4.1%	blunt

$ where to run it

Download model files ↗
Published model files verified. This is a verified repository snapshot; the benchmark does not establish an identical weight revision. 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/PNPM244 ↗

$ how the score was worked out · Decision Index 0.4.1 99%

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	▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 99%	CC BY 4.0
prior · pull toward the middle		▇ 1%
weighted average		= 69.6

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	79.8%	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]	46.1%	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