Global LLM Download Leaderboard
๐
47
HF text-generation, trailing 30-day downloads by country
openfree
openfree
AI & ML interests
Contact: arxivgpt@gmail.com
Recent Activity
updated a Space about 5 hours ago
VIDraft/global-llm-leaderboard updated a Space about 5 hours ago
VIDraft/media updated a Space about 11 hours ago
VIDraft/AIOrganizations
updated 2
Spaces about 5 hours ago
updated a
Space about 11 hours ago
updated a
bucket about 11 hours ago
liked a
Space 2 days ago
reacted to SeaWolf-AI's post with ๐ฅ 3 days ago
Post
6058
๐งฌ Darwin-180B-RSI โ an AI that learns from itself and knows when it's right
๐ FINAL-Bench/Darwin-180B-RSI
๐งฌ Darwin โ crossbreed and evolve the parent
Darwin diagnoses strong parent models like an MRI, inherits only their best parts, and evolves the weak spots โ producing a child stronger than its parents.
Father model: Qwen3.8-Flash-Next (180B MoE).
๐ง Rewired paths
๐น 12 full-attention layers ยท ๐น 36 linear-attention layers ยท ๐น 48 shared-expert layers โ precision-strengthened
๐ 512 routed experts ยท router ยท vision encoder โ untouched
โ Only 0.02% of the weights changed.
๐ RSI ร ๐๏ธ ZTC
RSI (recursive self-improvement): solve โ verify against real answers โ learn only the correct reasoning โ repeat.
ZTC (Zero-Token Confidence): reads the model's internal state once, before answering, and returns the probability the answer is right โ zero extra tokens. Returns answer + confidence as JSON.
{"answer": "...", "confidence": 0.97, "truncated": false}
โจ Synergy: ZTC finds where the model wavers โ RSI learns exactly there โ confidence gets sharper. Low confidence = stop, so agents don't act on wrong answers.
โก Same accuracy, 11% shorter reasoning โ faster and cheaper.
๐ https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14386
๐ค FINAL-Bench/Darwin-180B-RSI
๐๏ธ https://huggingface.co/collections/FINAL-Bench/ztc-models-jev-ecosystems
๐ The result โ #1 on five Hugging Face official leaderboards
๐ฅ AIME 2026 100% (first perfect score on the board)
๐ฅ HMMT Feb 2026 100% (first perfect score on the board)
๐ฅ GPQA Diamond 94.44%
๐ฅ MMLU-Pro 88.12%
๐ฅ MMMU-Pro 79.48%
๐ 131K-token thinking budget ยท bf16 ยท samples per benchmark listed on the model card. ๐
#Darwin #RSI #ZTC #AIME #HMMT #GPQA #MMLUPro #MMMUPro #OpenSource
๐ FINAL-Bench/Darwin-180B-RSI
๐งฌ Darwin โ crossbreed and evolve the parent
Darwin diagnoses strong parent models like an MRI, inherits only their best parts, and evolves the weak spots โ producing a child stronger than its parents.
Father model: Qwen3.8-Flash-Next (180B MoE).
๐ง Rewired paths
๐น 12 full-attention layers ยท ๐น 36 linear-attention layers ยท ๐น 48 shared-expert layers โ precision-strengthened
๐ 512 routed experts ยท router ยท vision encoder โ untouched
โ Only 0.02% of the weights changed.
๐ RSI ร ๐๏ธ ZTC
RSI (recursive self-improvement): solve โ verify against real answers โ learn only the correct reasoning โ repeat.
ZTC (Zero-Token Confidence): reads the model's internal state once, before answering, and returns the probability the answer is right โ zero extra tokens. Returns answer + confidence as JSON.
{"answer": "...", "confidence": 0.97, "truncated": false}
โจ Synergy: ZTC finds where the model wavers โ RSI learns exactly there โ confidence gets sharper. Low confidence = stop, so agents don't act on wrong answers.
โก Same accuracy, 11% shorter reasoning โ faster and cheaper.
๐ https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14386
๐ค FINAL-Bench/Darwin-180B-RSI
๐๏ธ https://huggingface.co/collections/FINAL-Bench/ztc-models-jev-ecosystems
๐ The result โ #1 on five Hugging Face official leaderboards
๐ฅ AIME 2026 100% (first perfect score on the board)
๐ฅ HMMT Feb 2026 100% (first perfect score on the board)
๐ฅ GPQA Diamond 94.44%
๐ฅ MMLU-Pro 88.12%
๐ฅ MMMU-Pro 79.48%
๐ 131K-token thinking budget ยท bf16 ยท samples per benchmark listed on the model card. ๐
#Darwin #RSI #ZTC #AIME #HMMT #GPQA #MMLUPro #MMMUPro #OpenSource
liked a
model 3 days ago
liked 2
models 6 days ago
liked a
Space 6 days ago
reacted to SeaWolf-AI's post with โค๏ธ๐๐๐ฅ 6 days ago
Post
3775
๐ผ๏ธ NO GPU, Only CPU : Z-Image model
Zero graphics cards. 46 seconds. Photoreal.
That laptop you're reading this on. No graphics card, right? It generates images.
No CUDA install. No Python environment. No driver changes. One binary, three model files. Done.
๐ Measured โ GPU count used: zero
512ร512 : 46.4 s
Korean prompt : 45.3 s (faster than English)
1024ร1024 : 192.7 s
Peak RAM : 6.42 GB
GPUs used : 0
(Intel Xeon Gold 6526Y ร2, 48 threads, Q4_0, 3 steps)
โก From 244 seconds to 46 โ 5.3ร
Run it on defaults and it takes 244 s. Switch to 3 steps and it's 48.6 s. Add VAE tiling and it's 46.4 s.
The biggest culprit was the default. Z-Image Turbo is distilled to paint in few strokes, but the tool's default is 20. We were throwing away 5ร for no reason. So were we, at first.
3 is the floor. Put 4 and 3 side by side and you cannot tell them apart. At 2 it collapses โ water droplets and wood grain vanish, and the surface turns cloth-like.
๐ Links
Model
FINAL-Bench/POCKET-Zimage-CPU
Live demo Space (runs on CPU)
FINAL-Bench/POCKET-Zimage-CPU
POCKET collection
FINAL-Bench/pocket-models-6a618ee5d23eafb7e185a5c6
Zero graphics cards. 46 seconds. Photoreal.
That laptop you're reading this on. No graphics card, right? It generates images.
No CUDA install. No Python environment. No driver changes. One binary, three model files. Done.
๐ Measured โ GPU count used: zero
512ร512 : 46.4 s
Korean prompt : 45.3 s (faster than English)
1024ร1024 : 192.7 s
Peak RAM : 6.42 GB
GPUs used : 0
(Intel Xeon Gold 6526Y ร2, 48 threads, Q4_0, 3 steps)
โก From 244 seconds to 46 โ 5.3ร
Run it on defaults and it takes 244 s. Switch to 3 steps and it's 48.6 s. Add VAE tiling and it's 46.4 s.
The biggest culprit was the default. Z-Image Turbo is distilled to paint in few strokes, but the tool's default is 20. We were throwing away 5ร for no reason. So were we, at first.
3 is the floor. Put 4 and 3 side by side and you cannot tell them apart. At 2 it collapses โ water droplets and wood grain vanish, and the surface turns cloth-like.
๐ Links
Model
FINAL-Bench/POCKET-Zimage-CPU
Live demo Space (runs on CPU)
FINAL-Bench/POCKET-Zimage-CPU
POCKET collection
FINAL-Bench/pocket-models-6a618ee5d23eafb7e185a5c6
- 2 replies
updated a
bucket 6 days ago
updated a
Space 7 days ago
liked a
Space 8 days ago
reacted to SeaWolf-AI's post with ๐๐ค 8 days ago
Post
3402
The cost of a judging gate is usually quoted as a number. This puts it on a Tetris board.
Three boards get the same piece order, and on every move the same proposal and the same noise โ a paired comparison. The gate decides one thing: keep this move, or draw again. Each board gets the same 60 seconds of gate time.
The text-writing gates get through 15โ22 moves. The generation-free gate gets through 40โ50. The boards that stop simply run out of clock.
It does not win on accuracy: on the same 2,018-question LODO set, JEV scores AUC 0.7350 against ZTC-Judge-27B's 0.7289. The separation is elsewhere. Clock โ 2.1 s vs 0.0615 s per call, and on a 200-candidate agent screen one judging call measured 3.206 s generative vs 0.033 s readout, same server. Calibration โ a gate is a threshold, and at ECE 0.4985 (vs ZTC 0.0245) a threshold stops carrying information. Mechanism โ a text judge can name option 42 when there is no option 42; a scoring readout cannot. Not a lower error rate. No path.
The curve in the ZTC panel is real online fitting, scored prequentially โ predict first, learn after โ with base weights untouched. Not recursive self-improvement.
Limits, also stated on the page: Laya's AUC and latency are not our measurements and are set equal to JEV's, so calibration is the only measured axis it differs on. The page is a simulation driven by measured constants.
KO / EN / ZH.
FINAL-Bench/Tetris-JEV-LAYA-ZTC
FINAL-Bench/ZTC-Judge-27B
Three boards get the same piece order, and on every move the same proposal and the same noise โ a paired comparison. The gate decides one thing: keep this move, or draw again. Each board gets the same 60 seconds of gate time.
The text-writing gates get through 15โ22 moves. The generation-free gate gets through 40โ50. The boards that stop simply run out of clock.
It does not win on accuracy: on the same 2,018-question LODO set, JEV scores AUC 0.7350 against ZTC-Judge-27B's 0.7289. The separation is elsewhere. Clock โ 2.1 s vs 0.0615 s per call, and on a 200-candidate agent screen one judging call measured 3.206 s generative vs 0.033 s readout, same server. Calibration โ a gate is a threshold, and at ECE 0.4985 (vs ZTC 0.0245) a threshold stops carrying information. Mechanism โ a text judge can name option 42 when there is no option 42; a scoring readout cannot. Not a lower error rate. No path.
The curve in the ZTC panel is real online fitting, scored prequentially โ predict first, learn after โ with base weights untouched. Not recursive self-improvement.
Limits, also stated on the page: Laya's AUC and latency are not our measurements and are set equal to JEV's, so calibration is the only measured axis it differs on. The page is a simulation driven by measured constants.
KO / EN / ZH.
FINAL-Bench/Tetris-JEV-LAYA-ZTC
FINAL-Bench/ZTC-Judge-27B
- 5 replies
updated a
Space 8 days ago