THE AI MODEL DIRECTORY Start exploring models here

Find your ideal AI model.

From language to images, open weights to APIs. Understand capabilities and compare real costs.
Find the right engine for your next idea.

Explore AI models 2

Provider Input Output License

Discover models worth your attention

tinybert-emotion-balanced

AdamCodd

This model is a fine-tuned version of bert-tiny on the emotion balanced dataset. It achieves the following results on the evaluation set: - Loss: 0.1809 - Accuracy: 0.9354 TinyBERT is 7.5 times smaller and 9.4 times faster on inference compared to its teacher BERT model (while DistilBERT is 40% smaller and 1.6 times faster than BERT). The model has been trained on 89_754 examples split into train, validation and test. Each label was perfectly balanced in each split. This model is not as accurate as the distilbert-emotion-balanced one because the focus was on speed, which can lead to misinterpretation of complex sentences. Despite this, its performance is quite good and should be more than sufficient for most use cases.

Text analysis

Input Text→ Output Text

Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately

View details ↗

CompareSource / docs ↗

vit-base-nsfw-detector

AdamCodd

This model is a fine-tuned version of vit-base-patch16-384 on around 25_000 images (drawings, photos...). It achieves the following results on the evaluation set: - Loss: 0.0937 - Accuracy: 0.9654 ** New [07/30] **: I created a new ViT model specifically to detect NSFW/SFW images for stable diffusion usage (read the disclaimer below for the reason): **AdamCodd/vit-nsfw-stable-diffusion**. **Disclaimer**: This model wasn't made with generative images in mind! There is no generated image in the dataset used here, and it performs significantly worse on generative images, which will require another ViT model specifically trained on generative images. Here are the model's actual scores for generative images to give you an idea: - Loss: 0.3682 (↑ 292.95%) - Accuracy: 0.8600 (↓ 10.91%) - F1: 0.8654 - AUC: 0.9376 (↓ 5.75%) - Precision: 0.8350 - Recall: 0.8980

Visual QAOpen weights

Input Image→ Output Text

Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately

View details ↗

CompareSource / docs ↗

COST EXPLORER

Great models. Clear costs.

Cost analysis

Adjust monthly token usage to compare estimated API costs.

Monthly input tokens 10 MMonthly output tokens 2 M1 M = 1 million tokens · USD
Compares base text-token rates within the same channel

Uses collected, comparable USD-per-million-token rates. Snapshots exclude cache discounts, tiers, extra reasoning output and taxes. Check current source prices.

MODEL HANDBOOK

Understand before you choose

Selection guide & FAQ

How should API prices be compared?+

Separate input, output and cache rates, then estimate the same workload. Image, audio and video rates may use items, duration or resolution rather than tokens.

Do open weights mean free commercial use?+

Not necessarily. Check each version’s license, commercial restrictions and policies. Self-hosting also incurs compute and maintenance costs.

Is the top-ranked model the best for me?+

Rankings depend on tasks, versions and methods. Compare accuracy, latency, reliability and costs on your own workload.