whatmodel.sh / decision / Xor 26B-A4B v1.2

Xor 26B-A4B v1.2

+ contribute

Xor 26B-A4B v1.2 is an open-weights decision model from Juspay Technologies, released 16 October 2026. Its published size is 25.81B parameters. Licence: apache-2.0.

Catalogue identity notes

Exact Decision Index tested engine xor-26b-a4b-v1.2; reported model Xor 26B-A4B v1.2. 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.

63.3±1.4#72 of 355 decision modelsfrom 42 benchmark results across 1 source

$ how it compares

The decision models ranked either side of Xor 26B-A4B v1.2, out of 357 with a score, then more from Juspay Technologies.

#	model	score	where	RAM	released
70	KnowLine 35B-A3B Gen1 PelaAI	64±4	model files		2026-10-12
71	jev-vision-27b e12ex2	64±4	model files
72	Xor 26B-A4B v1.2 Juspay Technologies	63±1	model files		2026-10-16
73	Senova-4B v2 WangSenQWQ	63±1	model files
74	Clef Cloudflare	63±1	api $0.24/M input tokens +local	~68GB	2026-10
	more from Juspay Technologies
123	Xor 1.2 Juspay Technologies	59±1	model files		2026-09-28
148	xor-26b-a4b-v1.1 Juspay Technologies	56±4	model files		2026-10-09

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

$ what it's good at

tools & automation▁▃▁▁▁▂▃▄▆██▆ #106 of 250 · 6.3% of its score · 6 tests

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	86.0% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▂█▂ beats 193/236	easy · avg 70%	▇ 1.9%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BFCL (case exact accuracy) submitted	95.7% ✎	▁▂▁▁▁▂▂▄▅▆█▁ beats 141/246	very easy · avg 92%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Home appliance simulator (case exact accuracy) submitted	60.2% ✎	█▁▁▃▄▄▆▄▁▂▁▃ beats 147/243	medium · avg 37%	▇ 1.2%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ToolRet (nDCG@10) submitted	66.1% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁·▁▁▁▄█▁ beats 161/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.1%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: When2Call (accuracy) submitted	64.6% ✎	▁▁▁▂▃▅▅▆█▇█▃ beats 78/246	easy · avg 72%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) submitted	79.9% ✎	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▁▁▁·▁▁▁▁▃▃█▅ #51 of 258 · 7.4% of its score · 7 tests

Beats H2O Lightning 31B v1.1, AutoTrust-JEV-27B v1.1, d1.1 (hosted) 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	48.9% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▄▇█ beats 216/246	medium · avg 38%	▇ 2.9%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Amazon ESCI (macro-F1) submitted	58.8% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▃▃█▅ beats 203/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 2.6%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: HoVer (accuracy) submitted	78.3% ✎	▆▆▇▅▄▄▃▇▄█▆▄ beats 135/246	easy · avg 74%	▇ 0.6%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: PhishNChips phishing decisions (accuracy) submitted	80.8% ✎	█▅▅▄▃▂▁▁▁▁·▁ beats 174/245	easy · avg 70%	▇ 0.6%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLINC150+OOS (macro-F1) submitted	93.3% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▃▆█▄ beats 180/238	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.3%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: BANKING77 (macro-F1) submitted	82.6% ✎	▁·▁▁▁▁▁▁▂█▇█ beats 113/238	easy · avg 79%	▇ 0.3%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: SGD/SGD-X (macro-F1) submitted	25.1% ✎	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▂▂▂▃▂▅▆▃█▆▄▃ #62 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	75.8% ✎	▁▂▃▅▅█▂····▁ beats 203/246	medium · avg 60%	▇▇ 5.5%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: NLI4CT (macro-F1) submitted	82.0% ✎	▁▁▁▂▂▃▃▄▇▇█▄ beats 172/246	easy · avg 74%	▇▇ 5.3%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: HellaSwag (accuracy) submitted	94.8% ✎	▂▄▂▂▄▇▃▇█▅▃▁ beats 191/246	very easy · avg 85%	▇ 3.5%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: iSarcasmEval (Sarcasm F1 · track A, English) submitted	63.4% ✎	▁·▁·▁▁▂▄▅█▇▄ beats 201/246	medium · avg 44%	▇ 2.7%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ACOS (per-review F1) submitted	27.8% ✎	▁··▂▃▃▅▇█▇▃▃ beats 157/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.6%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: VAST (macro-F1) submitted	67.0% ✎	▁▁▁▂▅▄▄▂▄▆█▄ beats 122/246	medium · avg 62%	▇ 1.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: ContractNLI (macro-F1) submitted	76.7% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▂▇▇█ beats 133/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: RAGTruth (F1 on hallucinated class) submitted	80.0% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▃▆█ beats 175/246	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	91.3% ✎	▁···▁▁▁▁▃▆█▃ beats 168/246	easy · avg 84%	▇ 0.5%	noisy

arts & human taste▁▇▄▃▅▅█▅▄▂▁▁ #26 of 247 · 10% of its score · 6 tests

Beats Jeffan-31b-1710, vLLM-SR d3-turbo v1.1 (27B), WeMM-JEV-27B here, though they rank higher overall. Trails Clef-omni, Clef, Senova-4B v2 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	72.7% ✎	▁▁▂▃▃▃▇▅█▅▃▁ beats 169/246	medium · avg 61%	▇▇ 4.1%	at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: Humicroedit (accuracy) submitted	66.3% ✎	▁·▁▃▂▂▅█▄▂▁▁ beats 218/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 2.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: POP909-CL (accuracy) submitted	61.7% ✎	▄▅▅▃▆▅▃▅▂▅▃█ beats 179/237	hard · avg 21%	▇ 1.3%	sharp · at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: cfcolor (accuracy) submitted	67.3% ✎	▁········▁▇█ beats 227/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.2%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: BPoMP (accuracy) submitted	96.8% ✎	▁█▄▄▅█▆▅▄▁▁▁ beats 220/246	easy · avg 83%	▇ 0.9%	sharp · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: Habermas Machine (accuracy) submitted	46.8% ✎	▁▂▄█▇▅▁▁▄▄▁▁ beats 158/246	medium · avg 47%	▇ 0.4%	blunt · at its level

knowledge & reasoning▁▂▂▂▂▃▃▅▅▆█▂ #67 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	66.8% ✎	▄▄▃▃▂▄▅▇██▅▁ beats 189/246	medium · avg 46%	▇▇▇▇▇ 11%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: MMLU (accuracy) submitted	85.2% ✎	▁▄▄▃▃▂▅▇▅█▇▁ beats 190/246	easy · avg 70%	▇▇ 6.2%	sharp
Decision Index 0.4.1: BBH (accuracy) submitted	78.0% ✎	▄▆▄▄█▇▇▄▃▁▁▁ beats 179/246	easy · avg 66%	▇▇ 6.1%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: GPQA Diamond (accuracy) submitted	45.9% ✎	▂▆▅▅▆█▆▃▁··▁ beats 160/246	medium · avg 39%	▇▇ 3.8%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: GSM8K (accuracy (4- and 10-choice)) submitted	75.2% ✎	▁··▄█▆▆▆▅▅▃▁ beats 205/246	medium · avg 45%	▇ 3.7%	sharp · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: WinoGrande (accuracy) submitted	86.5% ✎	█▅█▅▄█▆▄▃▃▁▁ beats 172/246	easy · avg 78%	▇ 2.8%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Challenge (accuracy) submitted	97.1% ✎	▂▂▂▂▂▂▁▃▄▆█▆ beats 201/246	very easy · avg 90%	▇ 2.3%	sharp · maxed out
Decision Index 0.4.1: SATA-Bench (case exact accuracy) submitted	37.6% ✎	▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▂▅█▂▁ beats 215/246	hard · avg 22%	▇ 1.9%	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	65.4% ✎	▁▁▂█▅▄▁▁▁▁▁▁ beats 181/246	medium · avg 60%	▇ 1.4%	blunt · at its level
Decision Index 0.4.1: CRUXEval (accuracy) submitted	70.9% ✎	██▄▃▃▄▁▁···▁ beats 170/246	medium · avg 58%	▇ 1.2%	at its level · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: CLadder (accuracy) submitted	73.3% ✎	▁███▆▅▃▃▁▁▁▁ beats 146/246	easy · avg 71%	▇ 1.0%	typical
Decision Index 0.4.1: ARC-Easy (accuracy) submitted	99.0% ✎	▁▁▂▁▂▂▂▂▃▆█▅ beats 180/246	very easy · avg 96%	▇ 1.0%	sharp · maxed out · noisy
Decision Index 0.4.1: ChessBench (accuracy) submitted	22.2% ✎	▄▇▄▄▄▆▄█▄▁▁▁ beats 193/246	hard · avg 16%	▇ 0.9%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: HLE (accuracy) submitted	10.4% ✎	▁▁▂▃▆█▇▅▅▃▁▁ beats 40/246	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)	58.3700 points ✎	▂▂▂▃▃▃▄▅▅▇█▃ beats 198/247	avg 41.206 points	▇▇▇ 6.4%	blunt
Decision Index 0.4.1: private new domains (equated points)	61.0600 points ✎	▃█▃▃▂▆▃▃▄▄▄▄ beats 189/247	avg 38.861 points	▇ 3.5%	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/juspay ↗

$ 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		= 63.3

not counted (2)

Decision Index 0.4.1	Decision Index 0.4.1: RouterBench (selected quality (quality objective)) [correct]	79.9%	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]	25.1%	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