Tern-35B-A3B

+ contribute

Tern-35B-A3B is an open-weights decision model from matthewagi. Its published size is 34.77B parameters. Licence: apache-2.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine tern-35b-a3b; reported model Tern-35B-A3B. 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.

62.1±1.4#86 of 355 decision modelsfrom 42 benchmark results across 1 source

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of Tern-35B-A3B, out of 357 with a score.

#	model	score	where	released
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
87	garum (Gemma 4 31B) plantwaterer	62±1	model files
88	Kev 27B Jared Palmer	62±1	model files	2026-09

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #134 of 250 · 6.5% of its score · 6 tests

Trails Amber 0.4B, OneJev1.6-0.8B, TokenRhythm NeoHorse-Jev-4B 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 174/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 2.0%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	93.6% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 115/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	54.5% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 137/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	67.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▁ beats 193/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	90.0% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 217/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 1.0%	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▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #133 of 258 · 7.2% of its score · 7 tests

Beats Quyet-1.0-Large here, though they rank higher overall. Trails vLLM-SR vela3-fast (Vela 3.0, 0.4B), crystal-0.8b, Kas 4B 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	43.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▄▇█ beats 136/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 2.9%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	52.2% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 122/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	87.0% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 209/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.6%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	73.2% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 143/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.6%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	89.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 114/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	90.5% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 190/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	10.5% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #43 of 256 · 22% of its score · 9 tests

Beats Ainvest-Decision-27B v1.0, Turion Jev 31B, MISA AI 2.0 Decision Plus · oak 1.1 (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	72.0% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 171/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 5.5%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	82.2% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 174/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 5.3%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	95.9% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 207/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	62.9% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 199/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	34.3% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 181/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.6%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	65.5% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 121/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 1.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	84.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 214/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	81.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 198/246	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	92.8% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 186/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.6%	noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▂▁▁ #73 of 247 · 10% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jev 1.13, Quyet-1.0-Large, jev-brain · Gemma-4-31B (decision readout) here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Amber 0.4B, Crivo-1B, Kas 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	69.9% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 150/246	medium · avg 61%	▇▇ 4.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	63.0% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▂▁▁ beats 170/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	65.1% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 181/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	11.8% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 107/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	92.7% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 174/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 1.0%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	59.7% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 198/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #66 of 263 · 44% of its score · 14 tests

Beats StartLux-Decision v1.1 9B, Sieve 27B v2, RSI-Jev v6.1 VL 27B (effort auto) 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	69.2% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 202/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇ 11%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	85.5% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 194/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇▇ 6.4%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	75.5% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 161/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 6.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	50.5% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 199/246	medium · avg 39%	▇ 3.7%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	76.2% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 211/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	85.5% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 165/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.9%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	96.8% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 183/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 2.5%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	32.5% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 177/246	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	56.1% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 81/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	73.5% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 177/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.2%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	99.0% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 177/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 1.1%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	67.8% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 119/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	16.6% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 128/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 0.8%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	10.0% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 29/246	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)	55.5900 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 174/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇ 6.2%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	58.1600 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 179/247	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/matthewagi ↗

$ 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		= 62.1

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]	10.5%	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