‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Introducing System One Models and Jev

1989 points · 520 comments · albelfio

  1. jacobgold · · focus · HN ↗
    First, congrats to the team on launching something genuinely interesting and new.

    Seems like a more accurate title would be "Jev: Trading general purpose generation for fast typed inference" or something like that.

    This is interesting, but the speed comparison seems misleading? A generative model that can output code in a Turing-complete language can do anything a computer can do.

    Jev can only generate structured output, right? This is probably super useful for classification/routing/scoring, but it's nothing like the code generating models we're all using today for code and automation.

    Also "can't hallucinate" seems wrong? Sure, it can't emit an invalid type, but it can still emit a completely wrong valid value. You can enforce structured output from an LLM too, with an appropriate harness, etc.

    Assuming there's no funny business, the Doom demo is cool.

    1. dbbk · · focus · HN ↗
      When they say "can't hallucinate" they mean they produce a confidence value for every result, so you could see for example it has 0.1 confidence, and you can disregard the result - that'd be different from hallucinating where it believes it's correct
      1. janalsncm · · focus · HN ↗
        Technically speaking when you send the prefix “The capital of France is “ into an LLM it will also produce probabilities across its whole vocabulary.
        1. sothatsit · · focus · HN ↗
          The probability values don’t really represent confidence in modern LLMs though, especially after RLHF and RLVR.

          System One says they use RLCD, Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions, which presumably has accurate probabilities as an explicit optimisation goal.

          1. nkozyra · · focus · HN ↗
            How is that different from RLVR?
            1. sothatsit · · focus · HN ↗
              RLVR generally upweights tokens along the whole thinking trace that led to a correct answer, whether each token was "correct" or not. RLVR doesn't train a model to output an 80% likelihood, it just trains it to produce correct answers, and not to produce incorrect ones.

              System One hasn't said how RLCD works, but they do say it is explicitly training models to output "calibrated" probabilities, which makes it distinct from RLVR. This is how they describe it:

              > System One models are trained for calibrated decisions: their probabilities are optimized against outcomes to reflect uncertainty.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.