granite-4.2-8B
webAI-Official基础档案已收录，详细介绍后续补充。可先查看厂商、分类与来源。
Basic profile indexed · More details to follow
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗DISCOVER & COMPARE
Explore AI models 8
TwIL-LM
webAI-OfficialA 1.7B reasoning model for **formal logic** tasks, built from `HuggingFaceTB/SmolLM2-1.7B-Instruct` through LoRA supervised fine-tuning, checkpoint fusion, WiSE-FT weight interpolation, and entropy-weighted GRPO reinforcement learning. It raises in-domain formal-logic performance by **+49% relative** over its base model (macro gate 0.263 → 0.393), and on the strict, no-partial-credit reading of Track A it is the strongest model we have measured at any size — ahead of Qwen3-8B and of a 26B Gemma-4 MoE. Its larger sibling, **TwIL-LM3** (3B, from SmolLM3), trades a smaller in-domain gain for strictly better held-out retention. If you care about not regressing on general benchmarks, prefer that one.
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗TwIL-LM2
webAI-Official基础档案已收录，详细介绍后续补充。可先查看厂商、分类与来源。
Basic profile indexed · More details to follow
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗TwIL-LM3
webAI-OfficialA 3B reasoning model for **formal logic** tasks, built from `HuggingFaceTB/SmolLM3-3B` through LoRA supervised fine-tuning, checkpoint fusion, WiSE-FT weight interpolation, and entropy-weighted GRPO reinforcement learning. It improves in-domain formal-logic performance by **+26% relative** over its base model (macro gate 0.336 → 0.422) **and improves held-out benchmark performance at the same time** (+0.022 core average). It is the only arm in this project that gains on both tracks, which is why it is the recommended release of the pair. * **Gains on both tracks at once** — the only arm in this project that does. In-domain macro gate 0.336 → 0.422, and the held-out 10-dataset macro 0.7193 → 0.7339 rather than the usual collapse that follows task-specific fine-tuning. * **Beats every arm up to and including LFM2.5-8B-A1B** — roughly three times its parameter count — on all six Track A objective lanes and all four summary rows, not on average alone. * **Competitive with 8B on strict scoring.** On strict-7, which gives no loose-match credit anywhere, it sits 0.012 behind Qwen3-8B (0.1971 against 0.2093) at 2.6x fewer parameters, and ahead of it on Lean formalisation (token-F1 0.5869 against 0.4022) and semantic parsing (0.4416 against 0.4257). * **Structured formal output.** Tuned for the objects rather than the prose: FOL translation, entailment labels, semantic parses, Lean statements and Lean proof critique. * **The most efficient arm measured, at any scale.** 482-token Track B generations and 32.9 completed answers per second — about eight times gpt-oss-120b's rate — because it answers short rather than because it decodes unusually fast. * **Lowest maths-corpus perplexity of any released arm in the table** (3.8229), including Qwen3-8B at 4.0083. * **Runs anywhere.** 3.08B parameters in bf16, with Q4\_K\_M GGUF at 1.78 GiB for CPU or 4 GB of VRAM.
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗TwIL-LM3-Pro
webAI-OfficialA 3.66B reasoning model for **formal logic** tasks, built from `ibm-granite/granite-4.2-3b` through LoRA supervised fine-tuning, checkpoint fusion, WiSE-FT weight interpolation, and entropy-weighted GRPO reinforcement learning. It improves in-domain formal-logic performance by **+28% relative** over its base model (macro gate 0.431 → 0.554) **while holding held-out benchmark performance** — the 10-dataset macro is level with the base (0.7942 → 0.7901) and the 14-dataset macro improves slightly (0.7332 → 0.7425). On the same harness and sampled rows it reaches the highest Track A macro gate, strict-7 and six-lane average of any arm in the tables below for which each can be computed, including Qwen3-8B, Qwen3.5-4B, VibeThinker-3B and gpt-oss-120b (the 120B has no gate or strict-7 value). *VibeThinker-webAI-trained is the public VibeThinker-3B after the same post-training pipeline (SLERP, d = 0.5, t = 0.5); see Against the tuned VibeThinker-3B. It has no strict-7 or six-lane-average value, so those bars show n/a.*
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗TwIL-LM3-Pro-LiteRT-LM
webAI-Official基础档案已收录，详细介绍后续补充。可先查看厂商、分类与来源。
Basic profile indexed · More details to follow
Input Text→ Output Text
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗webAI-ColVec1-4b
webAI-Official基础档案已收录，详细介绍后续补充。可先查看厂商、分类与来源。
Basic profile indexed · More details to follow
Input Not verified→ Output Not verified
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗webAI-ColVec1-9b
webAI-Official基础档案已收录，详细介绍后续补充。可先查看厂商、分类与来源。
Basic profile indexed · More details to follow
Input Not verified→ Output Not verified
Price not verifiedCheck multimodal and channel pricing separately
View details ↗No matching models
Adjust provider, category or input/output filters. New models are added continuously.
COST EXPLORER
Great models. Clear costs.
Adjust monthly token usage to compare estimated API costs.
1 M = 1 million tokens · USD
Compares base text-token rates within the same channel
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
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.