gutsy-0.8b v0.3

A decision model: given a state (text or JSON) and a typed question (yes/no, choice among up to 16 options per call, or ordered score), it returns a calibrated probability for every option from a single forward pass. It does not generate text. Fine-tuned from Qwen3.5-0.8B; distributed as a Q8_0 GGUF (775 MB) for llama.cpp, served by gutsy-inference, which adds state caching, shortlisting for lists up to 255 options, and calibrated temperatures.

Intended use

Routing, triage, moderation, policy checks, tool selection in agent loops, judging outputs, grounding checks: decisions about a state you provide, where you act on the probability. Use the probabilities with thresholds measured on your own labeled data; route low-confidence and high-stakes cases to a human.

Out of scope / unreliable: date and number arithmetic (compute in code first), applying new multi-step rulebooks, deciding whether an ambiguity is decisive, world-knowledge questions, non-English input. See Limitations.

How to use

Prompt format (must match exactly; the runtime builds it): Qwen ChatML with thinking disabled; the state, then the question, then options labeled A-P, then for choice and score questions the line Z. None of the options fits, or the state does not say. The answer is read from the next-token logits of the option letters (and Z), softmaxed over those letters only.

Easiest: the gutsy-inference runtime included in this repository:

hf download kouhxp/gutsy --local-dir gutsy
pip install -e gutsy/gutsy-inference              # needs llama-cpp-python >= 0.3.35
cd gutsy/gutsy-inference && mkdir -p models
cp ../gutsy-0.8b-v03-q8_0.gguf ../gutsy-0.8b-v03.calibration.json models/
cp models.example.json models.json && gutsy-inference serve

The models.json entry for this model:

"gutsy-0.8b-v03": {"gguf": "models/gutsy-0.8b-v03-q8_0.gguf",
                      "calibration": "models/gutsy-0.8b-v03.calibration.json",
                      "n_ctx": 8192, "reject_slot": true}

reject_slot must be on for this model. Shipped temperatures (fitted on held-out validation data with exact labels): choice 1.01, yes/no 0.86, score 1.00.

Training

A LoRA run on the same data (rank 32) tied this model exactly on JevBench's public set and stayed within a few points on every other evaluation.

Data (approximate counts; exact counts in the build's stats.json)

About 8% of eligible choice items are "reject" items (the correct option removed; the target is Z). About 30% of choice questions use short numeric keys. Roughly half of the reading, knowledge and judging records use the evaluation panel's request layouts (formats only).

Never trained on: JevBench, BBH, Financial PhraseBank, JudgeBench, the RAGTruth and WinoGrande test/validation items, BFCL, tau-bench, CommonsenseQA, BANKING77. Training data was decontaminated against the evaluation panel and JevBench public items (shared 13-word sequences). No closed-model output is used anywhere.

Evaluation

All results are self-run. Other systems' numbers are reported by their authors on possibly different harness versions and samples, so comparisons are indicative.

JevBench public set (231 items): 167 correct (0.723): easy 47/48, original 61/72, hard 59/111. Calibration error: easy 0.023, original 0.122, hard 0.078. Ordinal MAE: original 0.30, hard 0.59. Paraphrase agreement (original tier): 0.81. Reported by others on the same public set: Jev 0.866, decision-4b 0.883, Neriv 0.6B 0.636, XERON-0.4 0.558, tuned Laya 0.537.

Same items, measured side by side (700 eval items each): BoolQ 0.850 (Jev 0.906), SNLI 0.879 (Jev 0.883), CommonsenseQA 0.587 (Jev 0.863; never trained on).

Evaluation panel (700 items; JudgeBench 245): BBH 0.464, Financial PhraseBank 0.921, JudgeBench 0.596, RAGTruth 0.790 (in-domain), WinoGrande 0.657 (in-domain).

Routing: BANKING77 with all 77 intents, zero-shot: 0.609. Lists of 20-254 options: 0.999.

Calibration: validation calibration error 0.021 before temperature scaling; calibration error 0.010-0.052 on BoolQ, SNLI and CommonsenseQA.

Limitations

• Arithmetic and dates: JevBench temporal_numeric 0.33; held-out business-day and new-rulebook synthetic tasks are near chance, and the model is overconfident there.
• Ambiguity: JevBench ambiguous 0/7: it abstains where the stated rules decide the case and commits where it should ask or abstain.
• Knowledge is limited at 0.8B (CommonsenseQA 0.59).
• Long-list confidence is too low on easy lookups when shortlisting is used.
• Latency on CPU grows with state length: median 4.2 s, 95th percentile 23 s on JevBench's hard tier (long policies) on the author's machine; short states take under a second, and follow-up questions on a cached state take a fraction of that.
• Calibration out of distribution is weaker than on validation (BBH and WinoGrande want temperatures near 2).
• English only; context up to 8,192 tokens.

Disclosures

• Benchmark awareness: the data design for v0.3 was informed by the family-level JevBench public results of earlier internal versions. No JevBench item was trained on.
• In-domain data: RAGTruth and WinoGrande training splits; CLINC150 and MASSIVE training splits.
• Jev (typesafe/jev-1.13) was queried through its API only for side-by-side benchmarking; none of its output was used for training.

License

Apache 2.0 for the weights and the included runtime code. Built on Qwen3.5-0.8B (Apache 2.0); teacher-written data from Qwen3.8-27B (Apache 2.0). Training data sources and their licenses are credited in the table above; anyone redistributing that data itself must follow each source's terms.