Official JevBench v1.6.11

JevBench · second fresh regular draw, one row added

Uniphore-4B-Decider joins the four systems of v1.6.10 on the same fresh seeded draw: 5 self-hosted open systems were each scored on the same 1,500 decisions of draw v1.6-regular-20261012 (1,200 sealed plus the 300-item public set). The field median stays frozen at its v1.6.10 value, so the four earlier rows keep their scores; only ranks and confidence intervals are recomputed for the larger field. The sealed set was drawn after the previous regular draw shipped and does not overlap it. All 5 rows are complete and ranked. Historical scores keep their original dates and are listed separately below.

Aggregate results JSON · SHA-256 e04cd89b8a8686117f5ab4959c17ef1cfcbf047a326abadb3c34589a1baa6273 · Previous v1.6.10 (four rows) · Full historical board

JevBench v1.6.11 · headline

JevBench Capability Score

Capability ranking of Jev-class systems

Capability Score averages Intelligence and Calibration. metask-jev-rain-31B-trained leads the Jev-class systems with 78.9.

Jev-class means at most 2× the cost and median latency of Jev (v1.5 reference). How we choose ↘

Adjust cost / latency caps · 2× official
Official
#SystemICCap.$/1k
  1. 1metask-jev-rain-31B-trained70.749.278.9$0.049*
  2. 2metask-jev-rain-12B-trained67.851.577.9$0.041*
  3. 3Uniphore-4B-Decider34.264.757.1$0.015*
  4. 4Standard One 3B SH32.848.855.6$0.051*
  5. 5Krino-2B22.054.542.4$0.033*

Wide coloured bar = Capability Score (0–100). Thin bars: cost above, median latency below; shared log ratio scale 0.25× … 64× Jev (v1.5 reference), ticks at 1× and 2× (cap). Shorter is cheaper or faster. * = est. (estimated cost). # counts ranked Jev-class systems; “–” marks unranked or outside systems. Tap ⓘ or hover a row or thin bar for details.

Cost and latency correlate here (Spearman ρ = 0.20, n = 5).

  • Open weights · LLM decoder (5)
  • green: ≤ reference
  • amber: ≤ cap (2× reference)
  • red: > cap
Show general-purpose LLMs and other systems outside the limits

Sorted by Capability Score, not numbered. Each row says which limit it misses, measured against Jev ($0.032 per 1,000 decisions, median 0.62 s).

    Jev-class = cost per decision at most 2× Jev's (≤ $0.065 per 1,000 decisions) and median latency at most 2× Jev's (≤ 1.23 s), the adjusted p50 — the same median the speed chart plots, not the four-axis Speed score. 5 of 5 systems qualify; the other 0, including the general-purpose LLMs, are listed below the divider in the ranking. The charts below show speed and cost beside Capability Score; the official JevBench Score weighs all four axes.

    Capability against cost and speed

    Jev-class systems are shown by default. Bubble size follows the official JevBench Score; official rank stays unchanged. The five most capable Jev-class systems are labelled.

    Capability vs cost

    Upper right is best: more capable and cheaper. Cost is USD per 1,000 decisions on a log scale. The dashed line is 2× Jev’s cost.

    Capability vs cost: 5 systems. Upper right is best: more capable and cheaper.405060708090100$0.010$0.10$ per 1,000 decisions (log)Capability↑2× Jev (v1.5 reference)← priciercheaper →1. metask-jev-rain-31B-trained2. metask-jev-rain-12B-trained3. Uniphore-4B-Decider4. Standard One 3B SH5. Krino-2B
    5 systems. Tap a bubble for its values.

    Capability vs speed

    Upper right is best: more capable and faster. Speed here is the median-latency speed — the same adjusted median (p50) latency the Jev-class limit uses — a log scale, so each 20 points is 10× faster (median under the numbers). Self-hosted systems are plotted at the est. incl. network latency (2x measured + 150 ms); their measured loopback p50 (on-GPU, no network; not directly comparable with API latency) is in the tooltip. The dashed line is 2× Jev’s median latency.

    Capability vs speed: 5 systems. Upper right is best: more capable and faster.40506070809010070≈3.2 s80≈1.0 s90≈316 ms100≈100 msMedian-latency speedCapability↑2× Jev (v1.5 reference)← slowerfaster →1. metask-jev-rain-31B-trained2. metask-jev-rain-12B-trained3. Uniphore-4B-Decider4. Standard One 3B SH5. Krino-2B
    5 systems. Tap a bubble for its values.
    • Open weights · LLM decoder (5)
    • faint = outside Jev-class
    5 of 5 systems

    Model kind

    Jev-class

    Release

    No family reported in this release.

    Parameters

    No system in this release reports an exact parameter count.

    Developer/API price $/1k

    No system in this release reports a developer/API price.

    Base-model price $/1k
    Scored cost $/1k
    Alternative price $/1k

    No system in this release reports an alternative pricing scenario.

    p50 latency (s)
    p95 latency (s)

    JevBench v1.6.11

    JevBench Composite Score: 5 ranked systems

    Official· four axes 0–100, equal-weight harmonic mean · Method notes ↓

    Weights:
    Adjust weights ↓

    View by:Capability ↑

    The official order weighs Intelligence, Calibration, Speed and Cost equally. Each button re-sorts the same systems by one axis.

    Greener = stronger within its column.

    5 of 5 systems, sorted by official rank, #1 first.

    1. 1metask-jev-rain-12B-trainednewadapter · 12B · W4A16 INT4Base model: undisclosed67.6I 68C 88S 73K 51est.$0.041
    2. 2metask-jev-rain-31B-trainednewadapter · 31B · W4A16 INT4Base model: undisclosed66.9I 71C 87S 83K 49est.$0.049
    3. 3Uniphore-4B-Decidernewfine-tune · 4BBase model: undisclosed27.2I 34C 80S 88K 65est.$0.015
    4. 4Standard One 3B SHnewfine-tune · 3BBase model: undisclosed21.7I 33C 78S 87K 49est.$0.051
    5. 5Krino-2Bnewadapter · 2BBase model: undisclosed8.5I 22C 63S 92K 54est.$0.033
    Weights:
    Adjust weights ↓

    Weights are relative: each axis counts in proportion to its slider. The score stays a weighted harmonic mean with the low-axis gates; the gates still apply when an axis sits at 0. Only equal weights give the official JevBench Score and rank.

    Score = 4 / (1/I + 1/C + 1/S + 1/K) (each 0–100; × (axis / 50)² for Intelligence, Speed or Cost below 50)

    • Open weights · LLM decoder (5)
    I, C, S, K = Intelligence, Calibration, Speed, Cost; the est. pill = estimated cost; ann. = announced price; API = the operator's endpoint saw held-out benchmark inputs, without answers; $/1k decisions = US dollars per 1,000 decisions (not heat-shaded). Names link to each project.

    Compare two systems

    Pick any two. Radars for the score axes, use cases, chance-corrected competence per request type on the open and sealed sets, and competence per tier on each set. Further out is better on every spoke; the link keeps the pair.

    The four score axes

    Radar: the four score axes, two systemsThe four score axes, metask-jev-rain-12B-trained vs metask-jev-rain-31B-trained. Intelligence: 67.8 vs 70.7; Calibration: 87.9 vs 87.1; Speed: 73.4 vs 83.2; Cost: 51.5 vs 49.2.50100Intelligence: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 67.8; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 70.7Intelligence67.8 · 70.7Calibration: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 87.9; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 87.1Calibration87.9 · 87.1Speed: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 73.4; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 83.2Speed73.4 · 83.2Cost: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 51.5; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 49.2Cost51.5 · 49.2
    0–100, the values in the table. An axis a system has no published value for is left as a gap (it counts as 0 in the composite).

    Use cases (TypeSafe categories)

    Radar: use cases (typesafe categories), two systemsUse cases (TypeSafe categories), metask-jev-rain-12B-trained vs metask-jev-rain-31B-trained. Model routing: 74.3 vs 80.2; Financial crime: 60.8 vs 56.6. Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.−1000100Model routing: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 74.3; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 80.2 — Model routing: deciding which LLM or model tier should handle a prompt; classifying a request's intent, domain, difficulty or risk to pick a model. 217 items (75 open, 142 sealed).Model routing74.3 · 80.2Financial crime: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 60.8; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 56.6 — Financial crime: suspicious transactions, KYC, fraud alerts, entity matching for investigations. 30 items (4 open, 26 sealed).Financialcrime60.8 · 56.6

    Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.

    Measured application-category competence on this release’s item set. Chance-corrected competence per category (0 = chance, below chance negative, 100 = perfect), metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: open+sealed; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: open+sealed items pooled; only categories with at least 30 items are spokes, smaller ones are listed below. Hover a category for its definition and item count.A (metask-jev-rain-12B-trained) is measured on 2 of 2 spokes only, so it is drawn as points, not a shape — measured on fewer items; full radar after the next re-measure.B (metask-jev-rain-31B-trained) is measured on 2 of 2 spokes only, so it is drawn as points, not a shape — measured on fewer items; full radar after the next re-measure.Gaps, not zeros: Open spokes (n/a or n=…) have fewer than 30 answered items for that system or no published value.

    Low sample, n < 30 — indicative only

    Category (items)A: metask-jev-rain-12B-trainedB: metask-jev-rain-31B-trained
    LLM guardrails (27)72.2 n=2772.7 n=27
    Lead generation (25)72.2 n=2564.1 n=25
    Search and retrieval (24)95.0 n=2499.6 n=24
    Semantic code linting (24)52.0 n=2476.8 n=24
    Scientific discovery (23)30.8 n=2345.3 n=23
    Graphs and knowledge graphs (22)53.5 n=2270.1 n=22
    Gaming (22)51.1 n=2243.3 n=22
    Advertising (22)39.2 n=2248.5 n=22
    Feature extraction for predictive modeling (19)0.0 n=1935.4 n=19
    Risk assessment (18)68.1 n=1856.7 n=18
    Recruiting (18)76.2 n=1878.1 n=18
    Moderation and trust and safety (18)73.8 n=1849.0 n=18
    E-commerce marketplaces (17)30.1 n=1757.3 n=17
    Demand forecasting (17)43.9 n=170.0 n=17
    Insurance claims (15)65.4 n=1540.9 n=15

    No published value for either system (under 15 answered items, or no per-category values): Customer support (14), Legal and compliance (10).

    Not drawn on the radar: with so few items a single answer moves a category score by several points, so these values are noise-prone. These values become spokes once the item pool reaches 30 items per category.

    What each category means · items per category
    • Model routing — deciding which LLM or model tier should handle a prompt; classifying a request's intent, domain, difficulty or risk to pick a model. 217 items (75 open / 142 sealed)
    • Financial crime — suspicious transactions, KYC, fraud alerts, entity matching for investigations. 30 items (4 open / 26 sealed)

    Competence per request type, open / sealed

    Radar: competence per request type, open / sealed, two systemsCompetence per request type, open / sealed, metask-jev-rain-12B-trained vs metask-jev-rain-31B-trained. Choice · open: 80.5 vs 80.8; Choice · sealed: 69.1 vs 80.7; Noul · open: 79.6 vs 73.6; Noul · sealed: 66.6 vs 74.6; Score · open: 59.8 vs 63.2; Score · sealed: 51.5 vs 51.3. Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.−1000100Choice · open: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 80.5; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 80.8Choice · open80.5 · 80.8Choice · sealed: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 69.1; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 80.7Choice ·sealed69.1 · 80.7Noul · open: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 79.6; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 73.6Noul · open79.6 · 73.6Noul · sealed: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 66.6; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 74.6Noul · sealed66.6 · 74.6Score · open: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 59.8; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 63.2Score · open59.8 · 63.2Score · sealed: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 51.5; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 51.3Score ·sealed51.5 · 51.3

    Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.

    Chance-corrected competence for Choice, Noul and Score on the 300 open and 1200 sealed decisions.

    Competence per tier — open set

    Radar: competence per tier — open set, two systemsCompetence per tier — open set, metask-jev-rain-12B-trained vs metask-jev-rain-31B-trained. Easy: 91.7 vs 95.2; Standard: 68.5 vs 69.2; Judge: 72.9 vs 64.6; Hard: 74.7 vs 78.6. Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.−1000100Easy: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 91.7; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 95.2Easy91.7 · 95.2Standard: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 68.5; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 69.2Standard68.5 · 69.2Judge: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 72.9; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 64.6Judge72.9 · 64.6Hard: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 74.7; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 78.6Hard74.7 · 78.6

    Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.

    Per-tier competence, the three request types pooled by their published decision counts.

    Competence per tier — sealed set

    Radar: competence per tier — sealed set, two systemsCompetence per tier — sealed set, metask-jev-rain-12B-trained vs metask-jev-rain-31B-trained. Easy: 79.3 vs 86.2; Standard: 71.7 vs 70.9; Judge: 60.6 vs 71.8; Hard: 59.1 vs 68.8. Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.−1000100Easy: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 79.3; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 86.2Easy79.3 · 86.2Standard: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 71.7; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 70.9Standard71.7 · 70.9Judge: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 60.6; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 71.8Judge60.6 · 71.8Hard: metask-jev-rain-12B-trained: 59.1; metask-jev-rain-31B-trained: 68.8Hard59.1 · 68.8

    Linear signed scale: −100 at the centre, 0 on the bold middle ring, 100 at the rim.

    Per-tier competence on the sealed decisions, types pooled the same way; item text stays private.
    How the categories were made

    Chance-corrected competence (0 = chance, 100 = perfect) over the category's items the system saw, open and sealed pooled, tiers pooled: per request type the method's competence cell, then the mean over the request types present. Not part of the JevBench Score; never equated for API systems; compare systems within a category, not categories with each other. Values can be negative (below chance).

    Family and language are authoring metadata of every item in the frozen v1.6 pool; where a uc1 item was written for a TypeSafe use case, that authoring use case is shown. This draw has no subject-topic labels yet, so the topic radar is omitted rather than filled from another draw. All non-English uc1 items are machine-authored and not native-reviewed.

    • Cells with fewer than 15 items are omitted; categories under 30 items are marked low-n.
    • Core v1.6 items carry no use case; the use-case view covers the use-case (uc1) items only.
    All values as a table
    SpokeA: metask-jev-rain-12B-trainedB: metask-jev-rain-31B-trained
    The four score axes
    Intelligence67.870.7
    Calibration87.987.1
    Speed73.483.2
    Cost51.549.2
    Use cases (TypeSafe categories)
    Model routing74.380.2
    Financial crime60.856.6
    Competence per request type, open / sealed
    Choice · open80.580.8
    Choice · sealed69.180.7
    Noul · open79.673.6
    Noul · sealed66.674.6
    Score · open59.863.2
    Score · sealed51.551.3
    Competence per tier — open set
    Easy91.795.2
    Standard68.569.2
    Judge72.964.6
    Hard74.778.6
    Competence per tier — sealed set
    Easy79.386.2
    Standard71.770.9
    Judge60.671.8
    Hard59.168.8

    All 5 rows are self-hosted on evaluator-owned pods; there is no API lane in this release, so no equating was applied to any published cell. Sealed counts refer to self-hosted S (1,200); API rows use their original measured sealed basis.

    Languages

    Raw chance-corrected competence per item language (0 = chance, 100 = perfect; can be negative), from each system's own measured items: Self-hosted rows use S 1200 + P 300; API rows use their measured sealed subset plus P. Sage (A3) language cells and A2/A3 topic/use-case cells cover public P300 only. Raw and outside the Composite. Cells under 15 completed supported responses are left empty; recorded input refusals count toward coverage. A dagger (†) marks fewer than 30 completed responses. Competence retains all supported scored observations, including failures and refusals. Per-language coverage grows with the expanded uc1.1 multilingual pool, a candidate for a later release that is not part of v1.6.11. English (1,151 items) is listed first; the other 21 languages and the mixed-language group share 349 items. In 13 further groups no system reaches the 15-item reporting minimum, so they get no column (items in the pool shown): Mixed-language (14), French (14), Danish (13), Turkish (13), Swedish (11), Dutch (10), Korean (10), Chinese (10), Finnish (8), Czech (7), Ukrainian (7), Norwegian (6), Indonesian (4) — 127 items, scored like every other item.

    5 systems

    JevBench v1.6.11 competence by item language and system
    1151393231282521161515
    metask-jev-rain-12B-trainedself-hosted · S+P6572857481†45†59†25†49†77†
    metask-jev-rain-31B-trainedself-hosted · S+P7163906968†46†73†36†57†78†
    Uniphore-4B-Deciderself-hosted · S+P3225707152†29†0†18†74†15†
    Standard One 3B SHself-hosted · S+P2820777270†22†20†0†68†21†
    Krino-2Bself-hosted · S+P1643451221†22†0†0†19†12†

    Intelligence gate and Noul decisiveness

    The Composite applies a soft gate below Intelligence 50 (× (I/50)²). Rows under it show their value with a "below gate" label. The decisive rate is the share of valid Noul answers with P(yes) ≥ 0.80 or ≤ 0.20 (for systems that return only a label, every valid label counts as decisive); only decisive answers count as answers. Accuracy among decisive answers is a diagnostic and does not enter any score.

    SystemIntelligenceChoiceNoulScoreNoul decisive rateAccuracy among decisive
    metask-jev-rain-12B-trained67.8nativenativenative100 %86 %
    metask-jev-rain-31B-trained70.7nativenativenative100 %88 %
    Uniphore-4B-Decider34.2below gatenativenativenative72 %82 %
    Standard One 3B SH32.8below gatenativenativenative63 %84 %
    Krino-2B22.0below gatenativenativenative83 %71 %
    All data (5 systems)

    Method notes · fresh native cohort · v1.6.11

    Each system answered the same 1,200 freshly drawn sealed decisions and 300 public decisions on an offline GPU pod. Scores use methodology v1.6, O1S, with 1,000 bootstrap samples and seed 16.

    Capability is the mean of Intelligence and Calibration within the frozen Jev-class cost and median-latency caps. Composite is secondary. Failed and refused answers remain in the full 1,500-decision denominator.

    The public-versus-sealed gap reference is the median of this completed native cohort: 9.8 points. Historical scores are shown separately with their original dates and do not enter this cohort’s median or ranking. No API equating is applied.

    Latency. API models are timed end to end from our measuring host, network included. Self-hosted models are timed on our own hardware over loopback (on-GPU, no network), so their measured value is not directly comparable with API latency. The ranking and the latency cap use the same estimate for every self-hosted row: 2 × measured p50 + 150 ms (est. incl. network (2x + 150 ms)). Tables show the measured value first, tagged “on-GPU, no network”, and the estimate second. A model author can provide a hosted endpoint; we then time it exactly like an API, network included, with no assumption (on request: info@productivity-boost.com, or note it in your submission).

    Costs use each row’s documented price reference and measured usage on this draw. Subject-topic and use-case radars come from stored per-item results; only aggregates are published.

    Sliders, presets and What-If change your view; they do not change the official result. Wrappers and subsidised systems are listed below the ranking.

    Results SHA-256 e04cd89b8a8686117f5ab4959c17ef1cfcbf047a326abadb3c34589a1baa6273 · categories SHA-256 c571601594774d1cbf8693086e7e2cb9ff6e61ca89378d86e8013fd790744a8e · scoring source SHA-256 d58c075a88bd59c0c1a3a654de8824f5605491285ae8c6e92ea4911644adadd5.

    Read these scores against this release only

    Each JevBench release since v1.6 scores on its own fresh seeded draw, and the gap penalty is measured against the field median of that draw. This release’s median is 9.839526770355711, so its penalty threshold sits at 17.84; the live v1.6.1 board’s median is 2.573387642438244. That makes these numbers not directly comparable with the headline board or with earlier draws. It was frozen at v1.6.10 over its four members, so it is a small-field figure.

    Scoring keeps the frozen method: O1S, 1,000 bootstrap samples with seed 16, this draw’s own field median (frozen at v1.6.10 and held fixed for every release on this draw), all 1,500 decisions including recorded failures, and no API lane or equating. Every price on this board is a clearly labelled estimate from a base-model market reference or a documented per-1,000 figure, never a bill one of these systems issued.

    Refusals, errors and context-bound failures stay in the full 1,500 denominator. Every row kept its own package, model, runtime and context settings; nothing was re-run for presentation.

    NOT DIRECTLY COMPARABLE WITH THE LIVE v1.6.1 BOARD OR WITH THE EARLIER FRESH DRAWS. This release is a different draw with its own small-field median: G_med = 9.839526770355711, frozen from the four v1.6.10 members (Uniphore-4B-Decider does not move it), against 2.573387642438244 on the live field. G_med_flag_gt10 is false. The gap penalty is max(0, 1 - max(0, (gap - G_med) - 8)/100), so this field's threshold is G_med + 8 = 17.84. On the merged live board this draw is placed with offset 0 while its anchor runs are pending, exactly like the earlier fresh draws. Measured, not estimated: re-scored at the live field's median 2.573387642438244, Uniphore-4B-Decider Intelligence 34.152 would be 33.682 (gap 11.947); the four earlier rows are as stated in the v1.6.10 notes: standard_one_3b_sh Intelligence 32.786 would be 31.294 and metask_jev_rain_12b_trained 67.826 would be 67.587; krino-2b and metask_jev_rain_31b_trained are unchanged.

    Cost: no item is excluded from the cost basis on this draw. Every row is priced from its own measured usage block at a clearly-labelled ESTIMATE rate fixed before scoring (r99 and r101 pre-registrations); none is a bill any of these systems issued. Every row is under the published v1.6 cost ceiling of USD 0.0646 per 1,000 decisions. The cost normalizer C0 is USD 0.001 per 1,000 decisions with 30 cost points per decade.

    No subject-topic radar in this release: this draw's items have not been topic-labelled yet, and the shared topic labels of earlier draws do not cover its items. Families, use cases and languages are authoring metadata and are shown.

    v1.6.11 ADDS ONE ROW, Uniphore-4B-Decider, to the four of v1.6.10 on the same draw, under the same rule as the earlier same-draw additions: the field median stays the frozen v1.6.10 value, so all four earlier rows keep identical point scores, axes and capability; ranks and bootstrap confidence intervals are recomputed for the five-row roster, and raw_on_A and the field-level diagnostics (G_med_api_basis_P_vs_A, the API-basis offsets) move for that reason; none of them enters a score.

    krino-2b: All 1,500 items answered HTTP 200 with native probabilities. The 15 longest items of the draw (the same 15 that standard_one_3b_sh refuses) ran with the state truncated to 65,536 tokens, as the author's submitted serve command documents (KEV_TRUNCATE_STATES=1); every other item is at most 1,802 input tokens. Reference kernels were used (KEV_FUSED=0) because the documented pip install has no flash-linear-attention. Kev reports usage.output_tokens as the token count of the serialized answer JSON although nothing is generated (165,276 over 1,500 decisions); it is priced as reported at the frozen DeepInfra Qwen/Qwen3.5-2B reference, USD 0.02/0.10 per 1M. Measured on an evaluator-owned Lium H100 pod in an offline container (network none).

    metask_jev_rain_12b_trained: All 1,500 items answered HTTP 200. The author's service runs the authors' own int4 (W4A16) quantization of Google's Gemma 4 12B QAT checkpoint with their own rank-16 LoRA applied unmerged by vLLM; per its model card it takes a second pass on part of the items, so it reports generated output tokens (84,238 over 1,500 decisions) and its latency has a long tail (raw p95 8.1 s against a raw p50 of 0.13 s). Measured on an evaluator-owned Lium H100 80GB pod (IP geolocated to Nizhny Novgorod, Russia) in an offline container (network none). google/gemma-4-12b-it is not listed on OpenRouter, so the cost uses the nearest listed sibling, google/gemma-3-12b-it at USD 0.05/0.15 per 1M, times its own usage. It is a different system from the earlier metask_jev_rain_12b row.

    metask_jev_rain_31b_trained: All 1,500 items answered HTTP 200. The author's service runs Google's unchanged W4A16 Gemma 4 31B QAT checkpoint with the authors' own rank-16 LoRA applied unmerged by vLLM, at max_model_len 6,656 (per the measuring operator's handoff): longer inputs are shortened by the service's own documented extraction rule rather than refused, so the longest items were answered on a shortened state. The authors tested it on H200; it was measured on an evaluator-owned Lium H100 80GB pod (IP geolocated to Nizhny Novgorod, Russia) in an offline container (network none) with unchanged settings. The service reports 1 output token per decision; cost is the OpenRouter google/gemma-4-31b-it list price (USD 0.09/0.34 per 1M) times its own usage.

    standard_one_3b_sh: 15 of 1,500 items returned HTTP 422: they are the 15 longest items of the draw and exceed the model's documented 32,768-token context, so the author's server refuses them rather than truncating; scored wrong per method. Measured on an evaluator-owned Lium H100 pod in an offline container (network none). Priced at the M2 base-model floor, OpenRouter mistralai/ministral-3b-2512 at USD 0.10/0.10 per 1M, because the author's own list price (USD 0.038 per 1M input) is below that floor; the schema head generates no text, so output tokens are 0.

    uniphore-4b-decider: 15 of 1,500 inputs exceed the author's documented 16,384-token wrapper limit; the author's code refuses them (HTTP 422, no truncation) and they are scored as wrong per method, so 1,485 items were answered. The native readout is one forward pass, so output tokens are 0 and the cost is the input tokens at the frozen DeepInfra Qwen/Qwen3.5-4B reference, USD 0.03/0.15 per 1M (that listing is flagged deprecated in the frozen snapshot but remains the reference). Measured on an evaluator-owned Lium H100 pod in an offline container (network none), in the vllm/vllm-openai v0.31.0 image with transformers 5.17 and reference PyTorch kernels in place of the documented flash-linear-attention / causal-conv1d kernels, so its latency was measured on the fallback path. The author discloses that the public JevBench set was inspected repeatedly during development.

    Historical v1.3.0 board: weightings, per-task grid, topic radars and held-out diagnostics

    Open this section to load the earlier public-only board and diagnostics.