AliceThirty/G4-Alice-v1.2-31B-gguf
Text Generation • 31B • Updated • 1.44k • 1
Rafael
Linkincnt
·
AI & ML interests
None yet
Recent Activity
liked a model 3 days ago
AliceThirty/G4-Alice-v1.2-31B-gguf liked a model 3 days ago
Gryphe/Gemma-4-31B-StyleTune liked a model 17 days ago
google/gemma-4-31B-it-qat-q4_0-ggufOrganizations
None yet
liked 2
models 3 days ago
liked a
model 17 days ago
liked a
model 18 days ago
liked a
model 3 months ago
liked 2
models 4 months ago
liked 2
models 5 months ago
liked 2
models 7 months ago
liked 5
models 8 months ago
DavidAU/Gemma-3-The-Grand-Horror-27B-GGUF
Text Generation • 27B • Updated • 464 • 5
DrNicefellow/my_gptoss_uncensored_gguf
21B • Updated • 18 • 1
BeaverAI/Gemma-3-R1-27B-v1c-GGUF
27B • Updated • 9 • 1
bartowski/TheDrummer_Cydonia-Redux-22B-v1.1-GGUF
Text Generation • 22B • Updated • 1.21k • 6
mradermacher/Cydonia-Redux-22B-v1.1-GGUF
22B • Updated • 58 • 1
reacted to m-ric's post with 🚀 9 months ago
Post
5082
STOP EVERYTHING NOW - we might finally have a radical architecture improvement over Transformers!!! 🚨
A lone scientist just proposed Tiny Recursive Model (TRM), and it is literally the most impressive model that I've seen this year.
➡️ Tiny Recursive Model is 7M parameters
➡️ On ARC-AGI, it beats flagship models like Gemini-2.5-pro
Consider how wild this is: Gemini-2.5-pro must be over 10,000x bigger
and had 1,000 as many authors 😂 (Alexia is alone on the paper)
What's this sorcery?
In short: it's a very tiny Transformers, but it loops over itself at two different frequencies, updating two latent variables: one for the proposed answer and one for the reasoning.
@AlexiaJM started from the paper Hierarchical Reasoning Model, published a few months ago, that already showed breakthrough improvement on AGI for its small size (27M)
Hierarchical Reasoning Model had introduced one main feature:
🔎 Deep supervision
In their model, one part (here one layer) would run at high frequency, and another would be lower frequency, running only every n steps.
They had used a recurrent architecture, where these layers would repeat many times ; but to make it work they had to do many approximations, including not fully backpropagating the loss through all layers.
Alexia studied what was useful and what wasn't, and cleaned the architecture as follows :
Why use a recurrent architecture, when you can just make it a loop?
➡️ She made the network recursive, looping over itself
Why use 2 latent variables ?
➡️ She provides a crystal clear explanation : the one that changes frequently is the reasoning, the one that changes at low frequency is the proposed answer.
➡️ She runs ablation studies to validate that 2 is indeed optimal.
This new setup is a much more elegant way to process reasoning than generating huge chains of tokens as all flagship models currently do.
This might be the breakthrough we've been awaiting for so long!
A lone scientist just proposed Tiny Recursive Model (TRM), and it is literally the most impressive model that I've seen this year.
➡️ Tiny Recursive Model is 7M parameters
➡️ On ARC-AGI, it beats flagship models like Gemini-2.5-pro
Consider how wild this is: Gemini-2.5-pro must be over 10,000x bigger
and had 1,000 as many authors 😂 (Alexia is alone on the paper)
What's this sorcery?
In short: it's a very tiny Transformers, but it loops over itself at two different frequencies, updating two latent variables: one for the proposed answer and one for the reasoning.
@AlexiaJM started from the paper Hierarchical Reasoning Model, published a few months ago, that already showed breakthrough improvement on AGI for its small size (27M)
Hierarchical Reasoning Model had introduced one main feature:
🔎 Deep supervision
In their model, one part (here one layer) would run at high frequency, and another would be lower frequency, running only every n steps.
They had used a recurrent architecture, where these layers would repeat many times ; but to make it work they had to do many approximations, including not fully backpropagating the loss through all layers.
Alexia studied what was useful and what wasn't, and cleaned the architecture as follows :
Why use a recurrent architecture, when you can just make it a loop?
➡️ She made the network recursive, looping over itself
Why use 2 latent variables ?
➡️ She provides a crystal clear explanation : the one that changes frequently is the reasoning, the one that changes at low frequency is the proposed answer.
➡️ She runs ablation studies to validate that 2 is indeed optimal.
This new setup is a much more elegant way to process reasoning than generating huge chains of tokens as all flagship models currently do.
This might be the breakthrough we've been awaiting for so long!
- 4 replies
liked 3
models 9 months ago
