README.md

metadata

license: cc-by-nc-4.0
language:
  - en
base_model: cross-encoder/ettin-reranker-150m-v1
pipeline_tag: text-classification
library_name: transformers
tags:
  - decision-model
  - jev-style
  - typed-decisions
  - system-one
  - decision-index
  - knowledge-distillation
  - calibration
  - modernbert
  - ettin
  - cross-encoder
  - zero-shot-classification
  - classification
  - calibrated-probabilities
  - routing
  - multiple-choice
  - tool-selection
  - jev
datasets:
  - hotchpotch/bekko-system-one-dataset-v0
  - tasksource/procedural-typed-decisions
  - tasksource/tasksource-jev-typed-decisions
  - NousResearch/hermes-function-calling-v1
  - Team-ACE/ToolACE
  - glaiveai/glaive-function-calling-v2
  - causalNLP/cladder
  - galileo-ai/ragbench
  - theatticusproject/cuad
  - facebook/anli
  - nvidia/When2Call
model-index:
  - name: Crivo-150M
    results:
      - task:
          type: text-classification
          name: Typed decisions (choice / noul / score)
        dataset:
          name: Decision Index 0.3
          type: decision-index
        metrics:
          - type: public_index
            value: 34.38
            name: Public index (self-run, complete public suite; version 2)
        source:
          name: Decision Index 0.3 public suite, official kit
          url: >-
            https://huggingface.co/datasets/tardellirs/decision-index-results/tree/main/runs/crivo-150m-v2
      - task:
          type: text-classification
          name: Typed decisions (choice / noul / score)
        dataset:
          name: Decision Index 0.4
          type: decision-index
        metrics:
          - type: full_score
            value: 17.7
            name: Full score, Decision Index 0.4 (maintainer-run private tests)
        source:
          name: Jev Decision Index board
          url: https://huggingface.co/spaces/multimodalart/jev-decision-index

Crivo-150M

A compact typed-decision encoder for agents and pipelines. Version 2, distilled from Crivo-400M.

Paper: Joint or Per-Option? Compact Encoders for Closed-Set Decisions from 17 Million to 1 Billion Parameters (arXiv:2610.30970)

Crivo-150M reads a state and a set of typed questions (choice, noul, score) and returns a probability for every option in a single encoder pass. It does not generate text. It is built for the classify, route, gate and verify decisions that agents and pipelines make thousands of times, where a generative model is slow and expensive.

This is version 2. It has the same architecture and size as version 1, but it was retrained with the recipe of the newer Crivo models: the training data of Crivo-400M, with Crivo-400M as its teacher. Version 1 (Full 22.21 in the archived board edition 0.3.2, public 36.39) stays available at revision 7a6c745, and it scores higher than v2 on the board's private same-skill tests (27.74 vs 24.93); see Versions.

_{Board standing in Decision Index 0.4 (board snapshot 2026-10-20): Crivo-150M v2 has Full 17.70, on the Pareto frontier at 150M parameters, with five Crivo models on the frontier. Generated from the board's data/index.json by assets/plot_pareto.py.}

Architecture	Ettin / ModernBERT encoder, 22 layers, hidden 768, [OPT] readout + MLP scorer
Parameters	149.6M (149,610,241)
Base model	cross-encoder/ettin-reranker-150m-v1
Teacher	tardellirs/crivo-400m (knowledge distillation)
Decision Index	Full score 0.4 17.70 (maintainer-run private tests); public index 34.38 (self-run, 140,178 / 140,178 requests answered; shown, not counted in 0.4)
Latency, 1× A100 40 GB, bf16 (one request at a time)	median 18.0 ms · mean 26.1 ms · p95 44.4 ms per request
Context	trained up to 8,192 tokens; reads longer inputs whole, up to 32,768, without truncation
Language	English
License	CC BY-NC 4.0 (see License)

Crivo follows the typed-decision interface popularized by TypeSafe's Jev (a state plus typed questions in, a probability for every option out) and runs unmodified in the open Decision Index kit. It is an independent open model, not affiliated with or endorsed by TypeSafe, and not trained on Jev outputs. Crivo is Portuguese for "sieve"; passar pelo crivo, to pass through the sieve, means to be judged and sorted.

Resumo em português

Esta é a versão 2 do Crivo-150M, um encoder de decisões tipadas com 149M de parâmetros (Ettin/ModernBERT). Ele lê um state e perguntas choice, noul ou score e devolve uma probabilidade para cada opção numa única passada, sem gerar texto. A v2 tem a mesma arquitetura da v1, mas foi retreinada com os dados do Crivo-400M e destilada dele. No índice público do Decision Index 0.3 marca 34,38 (run completo publicado), contra 36,39 da v1: a v2 usa bem menos dados no formato exato das fontes da suíte e mais famílias de tarefas novas. Nos nossos painéis internos ela foi melhor, mas no Decision Index 0.4, que conta só os testes privados, a v2 tem Full score 17,70 (mesmas skills 24,93; domínios novos 5,48), e a v1 é melhor nos testes privados das mesmas skills (27,74). A v1 (Full 22,21 na edição arquivada 0.3.2) continua disponível na revisão 7a6c745. Treinado só com dados abertos, com verificação de contaminação contra a suíte. Funciona em inglês. Licença CC BY-NC 4.0 (uso não comercial).

Contents

• Results
• Versions
• Quick start
• Model details
• Training
• Contamination firewall
• Intended use and limitations
• License
• See also
• Acknowledgements
• Citation

Results

Decision Index 0.4 — Full score (board)

Scored by the maintainers on the board in the Decision Index 0.4 batch of 2026-10-20 (board entry "Crivo-150M v2", this revision). In edition 0.4 the Full score is 0.60 × private tests of the same skills + 0.40 × private tasks from new domains, both mapped onto the public scale using untuned stock models. The public index is still run and shown, but it no longer counts toward the Full score, and the new-domain tasks were revised. Edition 0.3.2 (0.20 public + 0.50 same skills + 0.30 new domains) stays available as an archive. Models within 0.9 points of the first model of a group share a rank group.

Full score 0.4	Private same skills	Private new domains	Public index (shown, not counted)	Board latency, median / p95 (1× RTX PRO 6000)	Rank group
17.70	24.93	5.48	34.38	13.4 / 24.5 ms	42 of 54

Rank group 42 is shared with vLLM-SR Decision 2.0 Eos 0.8B (Full 17.73), Crivo-68M (Full 17.69), vLLM-SR d3-edge (0.6B) (Full 17.12), Valen-0.8B (Full 17.07) and DecisionTune 1.0 (Full 16.88).

Version 1 was scored in the archived edition 0.3.2: Full 22.21 (private same skills 27.74, new domains 9.77; 0.3.2 formula and new-domain set), and it is not scored in 0.4. The private same-skill tests are the same in both editions, so those scores compare directly: v1 scores higher than v2 on the private same-skill tests (27.74 vs 24.93). The new-domain tasks were revised in 0.4, so the new-domain scores do not compare directly. To use v1, pin its revision (see Versions).

Compared with models of similar size (board, Decision Index 0.4):

Model	Parameters	Full 0.4	Same skills	New domains
Mola-68M	68.3M	14.96	21.99	3.52
Crivo-68M	68.4M	17.69	25.27	5.03
tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M)	149.0M	15.63	22.08	4.79
Mola-150M	149.3M	16.15	23.55	4.03
Crivo-150M v2	149.6M	17.70	24.93	5.48
Dinah-1	149.6M	16.08	22.29	5.45
DecisionTune 1.0	394.8M	16.88	22.11	7.31
Crivo-400M	395.8M	22.96	30.70	9.09

Crivo-150M v2 is on the board's Pareto frontier of size × Full score, by 0.01 points over Crivo-68M (17.69), which is 2.2× smaller and in the same rank group. It is the highest-scoring model of its size on the board.

Decision Index 0.3 — public index (self-run, complete)

Run with the official kit (apolinario/decision-index, commit 9eb2dbe, edition 0.3) on the complete public suite, with the engine shipped in this repository: every one of the 140,178 scoreable requests answered, none unsupported, nothing truncated. Scores are chance-corrected skill (0 = random guessing, 100 = perfect), weighted as the board does. Full results: tardellirs/decision-index-results → runs/crivo-150m-v2.

In edition 0.4 the board shows this public index next to the model, but it no longer counts toward the Full score.

Version	Public index	Raw	Knowledge & Reasoning	Language	Retrieval & Classification	Tools & Automation	Arts & Human Taste
v1 (7a6c745)	36.39	52.45	11.8	41.8	52.2	60.7	10.1
v2 (this revision)	34.38	51.32	8.3	34.5	48.2	62.8	21.8

Per-benchmark skill (0–100, chance-corrected), v1 and v2 — click to expand

★ = gold benchmark (weight 1.2 within its area). The index uses the native metric listed, chance-corrected.

Benchmark	Native metric	v1	v2
Knowledge & Reasoning
GPQA Diamond ★	accuracy	0.0	1.4
GSM8K	accuracy	2.0	1.2
ChessBench	accuracy	0.0	0.0
MuSR	accuracy	26.7	21.1
SATA-Bench	case exact accuracy	0.0	2.6
CRUXEval	accuracy	7.3	14.0
CLadder	accuracy	61.0	32.1
HLE ★	accuracy	0.0	0.4
MMLU-Pro ★	accuracy	3.4	4.3
BBH fixed-option tasks ★	accuracy	11.6	8.2
WinoGrande ★	accuracy	21.9	9.4
Language Understanding
ContractNLI	macro-F1	74.7	71.4
ANLI ★	macro-F1	19.0	7.6
HellaSwag ★	accuracy	48.9	39.0
ACOS	per-review F1	38.9	19.6
FinEntity	macro-F1	76.7	78.5
iSarcasmEval	sarcasm F1, track A English	0.0	0.0
VAST	macro-F1	61.4	58.5
NLI4CT	macro-F1	15.1	17.1
RAGTruth	F1 on hallucinated class	44.3	23.5
Retrieval & Classification
BANKING77 ★	macro-F1	90.6	85.7
CLINC150+OOS ★	macro-F1	91.8	89.5
BRIGHT ★	nDCG@10	18.6	21.9
Amazon ESCI	macro-F1	29.8	21.5
PhishNChips	accuracy (verdict)	4.0	0.1
HoVer	accuracy	69.4	60.3
Tools & Automation
BFCL ★	case exact accuracy	79.0	68.0
ToolRet	nDCG@10	55.7	57.0
API-Bank ★	accuracy	29.4	70.1
Home appliance simulator	case exact accuracy	79.5	63.6
When2Call	accuracy	62.5	52.6
Arts & Human Taste
BPoMP	accuracy	0.0	73.0
Humicroedit	accuracy	4.5	0.9
POP909-CL	accuracy	1.2	1.1
cfcolor	accuracy	0.6	0.4
Habermas Machine	accuracy	10.1	11.7
New Yorker caption matching	accuracy	44.1	43.4

• Strong: tool and API selection (API-Bank 70.1, BFCL 68.0, ToolRet 57.0, smart-home control 63.6), intent classification (BANKING77 85.7, CLINC150 89.5), entity sentiment (FinEntity 78.5), long-document NLI (ContractNLI 71.4, HoVer 60.3), stance (VAST 58.5) and original-vs-perturbed text (BPoMP 73.0).
• Weak: expert knowledge and multi-step reasoning (GPQA, HLE, MMLU-Pro, GSM8K, chess), adversarial NLI (ANLI 7.6), sarcasm and most subjective "taste" benchmarks.
• Against v1: large gains on API-Bank (+40.7) and BPoMP (+73.0); large drops on CLadder (−28.9), RAGTruth (−20.8), ACOS (−19.3), smart-home control (−15.9), WinoGrande (−12.5), ANLI (−11.4) and BFCL (−11.0). The drops are mostly on benchmarks where v1 trained on many rows of the benchmark's own source in the suite's exact layout (see Versions).

Internal selection panels (our own evaluation, not board scores)

Checkpoints were chosen on our own panels, never on the board and never on the complete public suite (it was run only on the final package). Two of the panels, run on v1 and v2 with the same engine, show what the new recipe changed. These are internal proxies, not substitutes for the board's private tests, and no Full score is estimated here.

Panel	What it measures	v1	v2
ND-proxy	mean chance-corrected skill on 21 held-out decision families from outside the suite (written rules and policies with exceptions, schedules, dates, propositional logic, code outputs and tests, arithmetic in context, rewritten items, product-domain decisions, and others), chosen because they track the board's new-domain scores across 26 models	0.150	0.224
SS-core	mean chance-corrected skill on our own development sets for 8 of the board's skills (BFCL, BANKING77, CLINC150, When2Call, NLI4CT, ANLI, Amazon ESCI, smart-home control), not built from suite rows	0.459	0.556

Both proxies rose from v1 to v2, but the board's private same-skill score fell (27.74 → 24.93): the SS-core panel did not track the board's same-skill tests for this change. One caveat on the ND-proxy: the v2 training data includes code-generated decision families of related kinds (policies with exceptions, schedules, dates, logic, executed code). They were filtered against the panel rows, but the panel partly measures transfer from them.

Versions

The repository holds two versions in its git history. main is version 2.

Version	Revision	Recipe	Public index (self-run)	Full score (board)
v2 (current)	a5e21d8067c5c37ba5f88cd498306ae5abfd625d	data of Crivo-400M, distilled from Crivo-400M, end of stage 3	34.38	17.70 in 0.4 (private same skills 24.93, new domains 5.48)
v1	7a6c745	own data mix, no teacher, average of stages 2 and 3	36.39	22.21 in 0.3.2 (private same skills 27.74, new domains 9.77); not scored in 0.4

v1 is the board entry submitted in October 2026 (public 36.39, Full 22.21, on the Pareto frontier at 150M parameters at the time). It is also the teacher of Crivo-17M and of Crivo-32M v1. To load it:

from huggingface_hub import snapshot_download
path = snapshot_download("tardellirs/crivo-150m", revision="7a6c7453c06be576e1b48aeb70429318402791d7")

What changed in v2, and why. v1 scored well on private tests of familiar skills (27.74) and lower on tasks from new domains (9.77). v2 was designed to trade some exact-source fit for breadth:

• Less exact source. v1 trained on 209,707 rows of the benchmarks' own train splits, all in the suite's layout, and on Bekko subsets capped at 6,000 decisions each. v2 caps every benchmark source at 5,000 rows, about half of them rewritten into other layouts (about 70,000 such rows in stage 1), and caps Bekko subsets at 1,200.
• More new task families. Code-generated decision families with exact labels, 328 tasksource task families, format-invariance augmentations, sibling sources of the suite's skills, open teacher labels and synthetic "which API next" dialogues (the API-Bank train split itself is not used; it repeats the test pool).
• A teacher. v2 is distilled from Crivo-400M (Full 0.4 22.96) on the same rows.
• Engine. The scoring head now runs in fp32 and the engine is the one shared by all current Crivo models; the interface, the inputs and the outputs are unchanged.

The result is a lower public index (36.39 → 34.38), with losses concentrated on benchmarks v1 had seen in exact layout (CLadder, RAGTruth, ACOS, smart-home control, BFCL), and higher scores on both internal proxies of the private parts (ND-proxy 0.150 → 0.224, SS-core 0.459 → 0.556). On the board, v2 scores 17.70 in edition 0.4, and its private same-skill score is below v1's (24.93 vs 27.74): capping the benchmarks' own train splits cost more on the private same-skill tests than the internal proxies suggested, so the board does not confirm the trade. If your task is close to one of the benchmarks where v1 is clearly ahead, v1 may serve you better; pin its revision.

Quick start

Standalone (no kit)

from huggingface_hub import snapshot_download
import sys; path = snapshot_download("tardellirs/crivo-150m"); sys.path.insert(0, path)
from crivo import Crivo

model = Crivo(path)                                 # CUDA if available, else CPU
out = model.answer(
    state={"ticket": "My card was charged twice for the same order."},
    questions={
        "intent": {"type": "choice", "instructions": "What does the customer want?",
                   "criteria": {"refund": "Money back for the duplicate charge",
                                "cancel": "Cancel the order",
                                "info": "Just asking for information"}},
        "urgent": {"type": "noul", "instructions": "The customer needs a fast response."},
    })
print(out["intent"]["choice"], out["intent"]["probabilities"])   # refund {'refund': 0.69, 'cancel': 0.08, 'info': 0.23}
print(out["urgent"]["noul"])                                     # 0.64

Question types:

type	criteria	answer
choice	{key: description or null}, 2+ options (no upper limit)	choice + probabilities over every key
noul	optional {"true": ..., "false": ...} describing both poles	noul = P(statement in instructions is true)
score	ordered list of level descriptions, lowest first	score = expected level + probabilities

state and instructions can be strings or JSON objects (rendered as compact JSON with sorted keys, exactly as in training). Pin a revision (snapshot_download(..., revision=...)) if you need a fixed version.

Decision Index kit

pip install "decision-index[transformers] @ git+https://github.com/apolinario/decision-index@9eb2dbe"
hf download tardellirs/crivo-150m --local-dir crivo-150m && cd crivo-150m
python -m decision_index pipeline --engine decision_index_engine:DecisionEngine --edition 0.3 --out runs/crivo-150m-v2

The engine defaults are the settings of the reported run: one option order (tta=1), fp32 scoring head, SDPA attention, batch_size=32, token_budget=65536, max_length=32768, bf16 autocast on CUDA. The state is tokenized once per request and all questions are batched. It raises Unsupported only for a question above max_length tokens, and there is none in the 0.3 suite.

Model details

Input. Each question is one sequence:

[CLS] instructions [SEP] state [SEP] [OPT] option_1 [OPT] option_2 … [OPT] option_n

where option_i is key: description (or just key). noul is two options (false, true); score levels are options 0: …, 1: …, …. A special token [OPT] (initialized from [SEP]) marks each option.

Readout. The encoder's hidden state at each [OPT] marker, plus a learned question-type embedding, goes through a small MLP scorer (LayerNorm → Linear → GELU → Linear, run in fp32) to one logit per option; a softmax over the options of the question gives the distribution. All questions of a request are batched together; options of a question see each other (full bidirectional attention), and option order was randomized during training so the model does not rely on position.

Context. ModernBERT/Ettin uses rotary position embeddings with alternating local (128-token) and global attention. Training used sequences up to 8,192 tokens. Longer inputs (in the 0.3 suite, mostly ToolRet requests carrying tool documents of ~23k tokens) are read whole with rotary positions up to 32,768 rather than refused or truncated.

Files. model.safetensors (fp32 weights), config.json (ModernBERT config + decision block), tokenizer files, model.py (architecture, rendering, tokenization), crivo.py (standalone API), decision_index_engine.py (kit engine).

Training

Full fine-tune of cross-encoder/ettin-reranker-150m-v1 in three stages, on exactly the training files of Crivo-400M, with Crivo-400M as the teacher in stages 1 and 2. Every example is one question with a target distribution over its options. The released weights are the end of stage 3.

Data

Stage	Questions	Content
1	638,306	Bekko System One dataset v0 (≤1,200 per subset) · code-generated decision families with exact labels (policies with exceptions and precedence, opaque label rules, schedules with constraints, ordinal severity, dates, propositional logic, executed code and tests, link-based phishing, multi-select) · format-invariance augmentations (opaque keys, key-only options, distractors, "none of the above") · 328 task families from tasksource/tasksource-jev-typed-decisions · sibling sources of the suite's skills (argument quality, SEntFiN, RAGBench, Hermes function calling, xLAM irrelevance, bitext banking and e-commerce intents, CUAD contracts) · train splits of the public benchmarks' sources, in the original layout and rewritten (≤5,000 per source) · tasksource/procedural-typed-decisions · original-vs-perturbed public-domain text · open teacher labels from Mapika/decider (open Qwen models) · CFPB complaint routing · commit-message matching (CommitPackFT)
2	169,437	tool selection (ToolACE, glaive), CLadder variants not used by the suite, SEntFiN entity sentiment, synthetic smart-home cases, 6,500 synthetic "which API next" dialogues with catalogs of ~50 APIs (gold calls from Hermes function calling), + replay of stage 1
3	24,635	long context up to 8,192 tokens: ContractNLI, RAGTruth, NLI4CT and other long inputs, plus 5,000 "which API next" dialogues with long catalogs (~6k tokens)

40 tasksource families were held out of training entirely and kept as a reserved check. No data labeled by Jev or any other proprietary decision API was used.

Distillation

Crivo-400M's logits were computed once over the stage-1 and stage-2 training rows (it agrees with the gold label on 82.7% and 87.8% of them); the same logits were used for Crivo-68M and Crivo-17M. The loss is

α · (CE + 0.5 · Brier) + (1 − α) · τ² · KL(teacher ‖ student), with α = 0.5,

τ = 2 for questions with more than two options and τ = 1 otherwise. Sources where the teacher agrees with the gold label on fewer than 60% of their training rows (mostly math, logic and spatial reasoning, human-preference ratings and many tasksource families), plus smart-home control, CLadder and RAGTruth, train on the gold label only: 163 sources in stage 1 and 46 in stage 2. Stage 3 (long context) trains on the gold label only.

Recipe

Stage	Init	Steps	LR (encoder / head)	Max length	Tokens per micro-batch × accumulation	Teacher
1	Ettin reranker 150M	5,941 (1 epoch)	3e-5 / 3e-4	2,048	8,192 × 4	Crivo-400M
2	stage 1 (final weights)	2,406	2e-5 / 2e-4	2,048	8,192 × 4	Crivo-400M
3	stage 2	2,589	1.5e-5 / 1e-4	8,192	8,192 × 4	none (gold)
Final	—	end of stage 3

AdamW (weight decay 0.01), linear warmup (5% stage 1, 3% after) and linear decay, bf16 autocast, option order shuffled for every choice example. A weight EMA (0.999) was kept during stage 1; the final stage-1 weights scored slightly better than the EMA and initialized stage 2. Every checkpoint choice (stage-1 final vs EMA; stage 2, stage 3 or their average; interpolations of 10% and 20% toward the base model, WiSE-FT) was made on our own panels: held-out new-domain decision families, a development set of the board's skills, an external evaluation-only benchmark and a public-suite sample. None of them used the board, and the complete public suite was run only on the final package. Stage 3 was best overall (SS-core 0.480 → 0.556 over stage 2, while the ND-proxy dipped from 0.242 to 0.224); the stage-2/3 average and both WiSE interpolations were worse.

Compute. One NVIDIA A100 40 GB (Lambda Cloud), shared with the training of Crivo-32M v2. Training, panels, packaging and the complete public suite of both models took about 5 h 15 min of wall time; the teacher logits were reused from the Crivo-68M / Crivo-17M run. A reproducibility check on the package (500 questions, batch size 32 vs 4) gave the same answer on every question (max probability difference 0).

Contamination firewall

The training files are the ones of Crivo-400M, checked at three levels:

1. Suite test rows. Every training example was checked against the 0.3 suite: same normalized state and question, same distinctive state, or a shared passage of ≥120 characters were dropped.
2. Our own panels. Strict leaf-level filter (any string of ≥25 normalized characters) against the held-out panels used for checkpoint selection, so the selection stayed honest.
3. Final audit of the exact training files: every question against all 563,686 questions of the 0.3 suite (normalized state + instructions): 0 matches; the rule above re-applied to every row: 0 hits.

The API-Bank train split was not used: its dialogues and API catalogs repeat those of the test pool. The API-Bank skill comes only from the synthetic dialogues above, built from Hermes function-calling data and filtered against the suite. Benchmarks whose sources have no clean train split were used for evaluation only. The teacher only labeled these same training rows; it never saw suite items.

Intended use and limitations

Intended use

Fast, local, probabilistic decisions over text or JSON state, as a cheap first pass or a component inside an agent or pipeline:

• routing, intent and topic classification;
• policy and guardrail gates;
• tool and API selection;
• relevance and hallucination checks, NLI-style verification.

Out of scope

• Open-ended generation, extraction or any task that needs free-text output.
• Expert knowledge questions, math and multi-step reasoning.
• High-stakes decisions about people without human review.

Limitations

• Modest on new domains. On the board's private tasks from new domains v2 scores 5.48 (edition 0.4). Validate on your own data before relying on it for an unfamiliar task.
• Some skills regressed from v1. On the board's private same-skill tests v2 is below v1 (24.93 vs 27.74); on the public suite v2 is clearly below v1 on causal inference (CLadder), hallucination detection (RAGTruth), aspect sentiment (ACOS), smart-home control, function calling (BFCL) and adversarial NLI (ANLI). If one of these is your use case, compare with v1 (revision 7a6c745).
• English only. Training data is almost entirely English; other languages are untested and likely weak.
• Little world knowledge, no step-by-step reasoning. Expect near-chance results on expert QA (GPQA, MMLU-Pro, HLE), math word problems, chess and code execution.
• Distilled model. It inherits Crivo-400M's biases and errors; where the teacher was wrong, the student often is too.
• Format sensitivity. Very different phrasings of a task may lose accuracy. Descriptive option text (key: description) works better than bare keys.
• The smart-home score is optimistic. The synthetic training cases reuse the suite's request templates (new houses only).
• Long inputs beyond 8,192 tokens are read without truncation but were never seen in training; quality there is uncertain.
• No temperature fitted. Treat probabilities as scores to threshold on your own data.

License

CC BY-NC 4.0, the same as its teacher, Crivo-400M, and as v1: several training sources are licensed for non-commercial use only (for example ANLI, CC BY-NC 4.0, and some Bekko dataset subsets), so the weights are released for non-commercial use. Upstream dataset licenses and terms continue to apply to the data. The base model (Ettin reranker 150M) is Apache-2.0.

See also

• The Crivo family, by size: Crivo-17M · Crivo-32M · Crivo-68M · Crivo-150M · Crivo-400M (Full 0.4 22.96, its teacher) · Crivo-1B (Full 0.4 28.96).
• Crivo collection.

Acknowledgements

• Ettin (JHU CLSP) and the Ettin reranker used as the starting point.
• Bekko System One (hotchpotch) for the open training dataset.
• Dinah-0 (Lukitaduarte) for the [OPT] readout design this model follows.
• tasksource for procedural and multi-task typed-decision data.
• Decider (Mapika) for its open teacher data.
• NousResearch, MadeAgents, Team-ACE, Glaive, Galileo, The Atticus Project, bitext and BigCode for the open datasets behind the sibling sources.
• The Decision Index maintainers and its open kit, which made a reproducible comparison possible.

Citation

@misc{stekel2026jointperoption,
  title         = {Joint or Per-Option? Compact Encoders for Closed-Set Decisions from 17 Million to 1 Billion Parameters},
  author        = {Tardelli Ronan Coelho Stekel},
  year          = {2026},
  eprint        = {2610.30970},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  primaryClass  = {cs.CL},
  url           = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.30970}
}

@misc{crivo150m2026,
  title        = {Crivo-150M: a small typed-decision encoder},
  author       = {Tardelli Stekel},
  year         = {2026},
  note         = {Version 2, distilled from Crivo-400M},
  howpublished = {Hugging Face model card},
  url          = {https://huggingface.co/tardellirs/crivo-150m}
}