whatmodel.sh / decision / Sifr 0.8B v3.1

Sifr 0.8B v3.1

+ contribute

Sifr 0.8B v3.1 is an open-weights decision model from mohamedlotfy50. Its published size is 0.87B parameters. Licence: apache-2.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine sifr-0.8b-v3.1; reported model Sifr 0.8B v3.1. 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.

33.1±1.0#290 of 355 decision modelsfrom 42 benchmark results across 1 source

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of Sifr 0.8B v3.1, out of 357 with a score.

#	model	score	where	RAM
290	CLM v0.1 (JevBench mini) Contrastive-LM	33±2	source code
291	Laya (typed-decisions) (JevBench mini) Convai Innovations	33±2	source code
292	Sifr 0.8B v3.1 mohamedlotfy50	33±1	model files
293	jevhome-E (JevBench mini) Jibril Frej	33±2	source code
294	vLLM-SR d3-edge (0.6B) vLLM Semantic Router	33±1	local	~2.6GB

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▃▃▄▆██▆ #204 of 250 · 10% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Cam1, mini-jev Qwen3-4B (decision readout), InternLM Intern-Decision Qwen3.5-2B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails JevK5 Lite, Mola-68M, Crivo-68M here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	79.6% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▃▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 45/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇▇ 5.4%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: API-Bank (accuracy) submitted	40.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▃▂█▂ beats 32/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 2.1%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	37.6% ✎	▁▁▁▃▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 23/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 1.1%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	50.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▃▄█▁ beats 32/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 0.7%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	0.0% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 27/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	59.5% ✎	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▁▁▁·▁▁▃▁▃▃█▅ #220 of 258 · 4.7% of its score · 7 tests

Beats Intelif Qwen3-4B, mini-jev Qwen3-4B (decision readout), open-jev (pngwn) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Bosun v3.1 0.6B LoRA, Crivo-32M v2, Jev-Style 0.8B v3 here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	31.4% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▃▃█▅ beats 38/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 1.4%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BRIGHT (nDCG@10) submitted	25.1% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▂▂▄▇█ beats 31/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	72.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 46/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.6%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	49.7% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 0/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.5%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	99.9% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▃ beats 245/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.5%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	68.0% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▃█▇█ beats 35/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	60.4% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▃▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #200 of 256 · 24% of its score · 9 tests

Beats TokenRhythm NeoHorse-Jev-4B, vLLM-SR vela3-fast (Vela 3.0, 0.4B), Saina Helm 2.0 v2 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails DecisionTune 1.0, vera-spark, JEV FLAN-T5 Large public v2 (342M) here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	73.0% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 57/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇▇▇▇ 10%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	39.9% ✎	▁▁▃▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 3/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 5.3%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ANLI (macro-F1) submitted	51.6% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 73/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 4.0%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	7.7% ✎	▁·▁·▁▃▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 6/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 1.3%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	29.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▃▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 16/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: FinEntity (macro-F1) submitted	85.7% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 104/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.9%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	48.0% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 68/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 0.8%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	51.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 52/246	easy · avg 66%	▇ 0.7%	at its level · noisy

1 more test

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	9.3% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 49/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 0.4%	noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▂▁▁ #230 of 247 · 7.3% of its score · 6 tests

Beats JEV Ettin 150M here, though they rank higher overall. Trails LFM2.5-350M-RLCD, system-one-gemma, Bekko System One v0 17M 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	34.1% ✎	▁▁▃▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 24/246	medium · avg 61%	▇ 3.0%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	50.3% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 17/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 1.7%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	49.9% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▂▁▁ beats 21/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	52.4% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 41/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 0.8%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	37.4% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 35/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	3.3% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 63/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 0.1%	sharp · too hard for it · noisy

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▃▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #212 of 263 · 48% of its score · 14 tests

Beats Crivo-1B, vLLM-SR vela3-fast (Vela 3.0, 0.4B), Decision-1.0-Eos-0.8B (DecisionBench 3c2d6326) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails laya (DecisionBench 1c5edc17), DM-JEPA 1.1 here, though they rank lower overall.

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	68.8% ✎	▂▂▂▂▃▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 51/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇▇▇▇ 10%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	85.9% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▃▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 56/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇▇▇▇ 10%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	48.6% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 50/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇▇ 6.7%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	44.5% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 49/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 5.4%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU-Pro (accuracy) submitted	19.8% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 38/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇ 5.2%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	59.1% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 41/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 3.5%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	27.0% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 37/246	medium · avg 39%	▇ 1.8%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	19.3% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 31/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 1.7%	sharp

6 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: MuSR (accuracy) submitted	56.3% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 86/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 0.9%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	66.6% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 106/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 0.9%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	33.9% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 19/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 0.8%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	33.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 185/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 0.5%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	7.7% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 17/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 0.3%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	15.8% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 216/246	very hard · avg 13%	▇ 0.0%	blunt

other tests2 not in a task · 5.7% of its score

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: private same skills (equated points)	18.0900 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 32/247	avg 41.206 points	▇ 3.7%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	9.2000 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 16/247	avg 38.861 points	▇ 2.0%	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/mohamedlotfy50 ↗

$ how the score was worked out · Decision Index 0.4.1 100%

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	▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 100%	CC BY 4.0
prior · pull toward the middle		▇ 0%
weighted average		= 33.1

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	59.5%	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]	60.4%	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