whatmodel.sh / decision / SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7

SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7

+ contribute

SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7 is an open-weights decision model from SkyPanther. Its published size is 25.81B parameters. Licence: apache-2.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine synack-decide-26b-a4b-v7; reported model SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7. 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

· Weights licence ↗ · Parameter count ↗

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

62.3±1.4#84 of 355 decision modelsfrom 42 benchmark results across 1 source

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7, out of 357 with a score.

#	model	score	where
82	deck31b (Gemma 4 31B) (decision readout) krishna-gogineni-765	63±1	source code
83	JEV-35B AutoTrust AI Lab	63±1	model files
84	SynACK Decide 26B-A4B v7 SkyPanther	62±1	model files
85	Decider chat · Gemma-4-31B (decision readout) Mapika	62±1	source code
86	Tern-35B-A3B matthewagi	62±1	model files

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #111 of 250 · 6.4% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Senova-4B v2 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails OneJev1.6-0.8B, TokenRhythm NeoHorse-Jev-4B, mmastrac diffgemma (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	82.5% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▂█▂ beats 131/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 2.0%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	95.4% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 135/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	75.0% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 184/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	67.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▁ beats 185/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	84.3% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 167/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	80.1% ✎	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▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #75 of 258 · 7.3% of its score · 7 tests

Beats AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1, oenogarum (Gemma 4 31B), Decider 31B (NVFP4) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails StartLux-Decision v1.1 0.8B, Standard One 3B SH (v4), Standard One 8B SH (v4) 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 201/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 2.9%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	56.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 178/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	73.5% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 114/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.6%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	78.6% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 166/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.6%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	92.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 159/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	84.8% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 132/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	37.2% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #72 of 256 · 22% of its score · 9 tests

Beats Turion Jev 31B, AJev lm6q (Gemma 4 31B), oenogarum (Gemma 4 31B) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Sieve 4B, Decider 35B-A3B, CoCo-Decision-4B 2.4 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	73.4% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 181/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 5.5%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	80.6% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 157/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 5.3%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	94.3% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 179/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	59.5% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 181/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	24.9% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 145/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.6%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	77.3% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 188/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 1.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	77.1% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 136/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	80.0% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 173/246	easy · avg 66%	▇ 0.8%	noisy

1 more test

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: FinEntity (macro-F1) submitted	93.3% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 199/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.6%	noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▂▁▁ #92 of 247 · 10% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jev 1.13, jev-brain · Gemma-4-31B (decision readout), Jeffan-4B-2010 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails vLLM-SR vela3-fast-vision (Vela 3.0, 0.25B), Crivo-400M, Amber 0.4B 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	79.5% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 217/246	medium · avg 61%	▇▇ 4.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	64.0% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▂▁▁ beats 192/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	34.6% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 153/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	66.2% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 210/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	90.9% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 153/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 1.0%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	63.0% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 230/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #81 of 263 · 44% of its score · 14 tests

Beats StartLux-Decision v1.1 4B, KnowLine 4B Gen5.5, Jeffan-4B-2010 here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Solar Decide, Clef-flash, Decider chat · Qwen3.6-27B (decision readout) 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	65.9% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 185/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇ 11%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	83.5% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 170/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇▇ 6.3%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	80.7% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 197/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 6.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	48.5% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 183/246	medium · avg 39%	▇▇ 3.8%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	63.9% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 170/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	83.6% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 149/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.9%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	95.9% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 159/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 2.4%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	34.5% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 199/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.8%	at its level

6 more tests

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: MuSR (accuracy) submitted	63.4% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 164/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	71.2% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 172/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.2%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	98.9% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 172/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 1.1%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	71.8% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 135/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	21.7% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 181/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 0.9%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	11.6% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 88/246	very hard · avg 13%	▇ 0.0%	blunt

other tests2 not in a task · 10% of its score

test	result	vs the others in its run	difficulty	counts	why
Decision Index 0.4.1: private same skills (equated points)	55.8900 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 177/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇ 6.2%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	56.7200 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 175/247	avg 38.861 points	▇ 3.4%	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/SkyPanther ↗

$ 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		= 62.3

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	80.1%	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]	37.2%	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