whatmodel.sh / decision / RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto)

RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto)

+ contribute

RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto) is an open-weights decision model from shgao, released 8 October 2026. Its published size is 27.78B parameters. Licence: apache-2.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine rsi-jev-v6.1-vl-27b-auto; reported model RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto). Type: LoRA; 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

Release date ↗ · Weights licence ↗ · Parameter count ↗

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

65.5±1.3#51 of 355 decision modelsfrom 54 benchmark results across 2 sources

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto), out of 357 with a score, then more from shgao.

#	model	score	where	released
49	Jev 1.13 TypeSafe	66±1	api $0.042/M input tokens	2026-09-15
50	Span-02 (Gemma 4 26B-A4B) Respan	66±1	api price unknown
51	RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto) shgao	66±1	model files	2026-10-08
52	KnowLine 9B Gen1 PelaAI	66±1	model files
53	Herbert v0.5 leinenterprises	65±4	model files
	more from shgao
181	RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 4B shgao	53±1	model files	2026-10-07
228	RSI-Jev v5.0 VL 3B shgao	48±1	model files	2026-10

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #38 of 250 · 5.2% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710, Fastino GLiDE 1.2, vLLM-SR d3-ultra (Decision 3.0, 27B) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Solomon v1.1, Clef-flash, Clef-omni 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 210/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 1.5%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	68.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▁ beats 206/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.0%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	79.5% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 189/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 0.9%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	97.6% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 210/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 0.9%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	81.5% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 153/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 0.8%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	78.5% ✎	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▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #36 of 258 · 6.6% of its score · 7 tests

Beats Perplexity Decider v1.1 (27B), H2O Lightning 31B v1.1, AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails StartLux-Decision v1.1 2B, GEV-26B-Decide, JEV-35B 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	48.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▄▇█ beats 200/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 2.7%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	59.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 210/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.4%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	88.5% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 223/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.5%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	78.1% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 164/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.5%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	92.3% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 219/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	94.1% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 194/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	26.1% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #34 of 256 · 19% of its score · 9 tests

Beats Ainvest-Decision-27B v1.0, H2O Lightning 31B v1.1, Turion Jev 31B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Clef-flash, Clef-omni, vLLM-SR d3-flash (9B) 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	76.8% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 212/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 4.8%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	84.9% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 212/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 4.5%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	96.4% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 214/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 2.7%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	66.2% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 212/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.4%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	32.1% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 171/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.5%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	78.1% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 198/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 0.9%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	84.0% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 207/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 0.9%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	83.9% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 221/246	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	92.8% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 187/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.4%	maxed out · noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▃▁▁ #17 of 247 · 8.9% 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) 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	80.1% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 222/246	medium · avg 61%	▇ 3.5%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	60.8% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▂▁▁ beats 113/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.0%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	81.1% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 223/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.1%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	66.9% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 224/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	97.6% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 231/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.8%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	57.2% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▃▄▄▁▁ beats 189/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #73 of 263 · 37% of its score · 14 tests

Beats StartLux-Decision v1.1 9B, Sieve 27B v2 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Solar Decide, Clef-flash, Clef-omni 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	65.3% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 184/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇ 10%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	83.2% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 167/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇ 5.2%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	89.2% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 231/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 5.2%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	51.0% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 205/246	medium · avg 39%	▇ 3.5%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	74.7% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 202/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.2%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	91.4% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 207/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.4%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	36.7% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 213/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.8%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	96.4% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 172/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 1.7%	sharp · maxed out

6 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: MuSR (accuracy) submitted	66.0% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 187/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	78.6% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 192/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.0%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	84.2% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 199/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 0.9%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	26.0% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 229/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 0.8%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	98.4% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 152/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 0.7%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	9.2% ✎	▁▁▃▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 13/246	very hard · avg 13%	▇ 0.0%	blunt

vision▁·▃▂▃▃▇▄▄█▄▃ #38 of 79 · 13% of its score · 12 tests

Trails Clef-flash, Xor 1.2, OneJev1.5-9B 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	75.7500 points ✎	▁·▁▁▃▁▄▄▃▅█▂ beats 31/61	avg 63.423 points	▇ 1.7%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · MMMU-Pro vision (chance-corrected points) submitted	35.9600 points ✎	▁▁▅▁▄▁▄█▄▃▇▇ beats 38/61	avg 22.797 points	▇ 1.6%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · Winoground (chance-corrected points) submitted	82.2500 points ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁·▂▁▃▅█ beats 38/61	avg 66.987 points	▇ 1.4%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4: private same skills (points)	59.3600 points ✎	▁▁▃▃▁▂▄▆▃▃▅█ beats 38/61	avg 48.067 points	▇ 1.4%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · Moderation (Hateful Memes) (chance-corrected points) submitted	29.6000 points ✎	▆▃▃▆▄▄▇██▁▆▆ beats 21/61	avg 28.443 points	▇ 1.2%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · RealWorldQA (chance-corrected points) submitted	65.6000 points ✎	▁·▂▂▁▃▃▅▅▃▂█ beats 41/61	avg 53.651 points	▇ 1.1%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · CharXiv (chance-corrected points) submitted	79.4500 points ✎	▂▁▁▁▁▃▁▅▅▆██ beats 48/61	avg 62.137 points	▇ 1.1%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · InfographicVQA (chance-corrected points) submitted	93.9900 points ✎	▁·▁▂▁▁▃▁▂▂▅█ beats 36/61	avg 83.859 points	▇ 0.9%	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	23.4800 points ✎	▂▄▇▆█▄▄▇▂··▁ beats 31/61	avg 19.676 points	▇ 0.9%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · BLINK (chance-corrected points) submitted	53.2800 points ✎	▁···▁▂▂▂█▄▂▃ beats 28/61	avg 44.994 points	▇ 0.8%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · CV-Bench (chance-corrected points) submitted	77.8200 points ✎	▁▁▁▁▂▁▁▁▄█▃▃ beats 54/61	avg 67.662 points	▇ 0.7%	blunt
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · KIE (CORD+FUNSD) (chance-corrected points) submitted	91.0500 points ✎	▁··▁▁▁▁▁▂▄█▁ beats 28/61	avg 85.184 points	▇ 0.5%	blunt

other tests2 not in a task · 9.0% of its score

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: private same skills (equated points)	57.8100 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 193/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇ 5.8%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	59.7900 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 184/247	avg 38.861 points	▇ 3.2%	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/shgao ↗

$ how the score was worked out · Decision Index 0.4.1 86%, Decision Index Vision 0.4 13%

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	▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 86%	CC BY 4.0
Decision Index Vision 0.4 · submitted; independent execution unverified	12	▇▇▇▇ 13%	CC BY 4.0
prior · pull toward the middle		▇ 1%
weighted average		= 65.5

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	78.5%	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]	26.1%	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