开放杰夫
OpenJev

原始链接: https://openjev.com/

**OpenJev** 是一款基于浏览器的实验性工具,旨在对从本地大语言模型(LLM)提取决策概率的两种方法进行基准测试。 该平台允许用户比较: 1. **直接读取(Direct Readout):** 直接从模型的内部 Logits 中提取选择概率,无需解码文本。 2. **生成(Generation):** 强制模型以 JSON 文本格式逐个 token 输出概率分布。 所有流程均在浏览器中利用本地 GPU 运行;没有任何数据会被发送至后端。用户可以选择各种模型尺寸(从 0.6B 的 Qwen3 到 4B 的 Qwen3.5),以观察在速度和延迟方面的性能差异。 由于模型使用量化后的 GGUF 权重在浏览器中运行,因此计时指标提供了关于不同架构如何处理推理的真实视角。该实验突显了直接、高效的计算与资源密集型、分步文本生成方法之间的权衡。无需排队等待——只需选择一个模型,将其加载到缓存中,即可自行比较执行时间。

这篇 Hacker News 帖子讨论了“OpenJev”,这是一个试图复刻“Jev”界面模式的开源项目。Jev 是一个闭源的高速概率决策模型。 讨论主要集中在以下三个方面: 1. **技术实现**:用户们争论该项目跳过传统的文本解码,转而直接进行概率测量的方法是否具有真正的创新性。一些贡献者分享了他们自己定制的推理引擎,指出通过微调模型来测量特定 Token 而非生成完整序列,即可达到“类 Jev”的性能。 2. **对“氛围编程”(Vibecoding)的批评**:帖子中有很大一部分内容批评了该网站的“氛围编程”审美——这是针对大语言模型生成网站的常见抱怨。用户认为这些网站视觉上杂乱无章,充斥着“填充”文本,且在设计和层级结构上缺乏人为的意图。许多人觉得这种“AI 风格”的写作和布局令人反感且千篇一律。 3. **对 Jev 的困惑**:人们对 Jev 究竟是一种独特的架构,还是仅仅是一个用于描述专用高速分类器的营销术语感到困惑。怀疑论者指出,该项目缺乏基准测试和文档,加上其命名方式,与标准的透明分类方法相比,造成了法律和知识产权方面的模糊性。
相关文章

原文
openjev

A live, local experiment

A local model can either read probabilities for your allowed options without decoding them, or write the same kind of distribution token by token. Pick a size, run both on your own GPU, and measure the difference.

browser onlyno backendyour timings1.56 GB model

There is no waitlist! Just try it out ↓

MiniCPM5 2B is selected by default. On a phone or smaller device, switch to Qwen3 0.6B in the model box if needed.

00 / setup

Load the model once

Larger model. Loading may be slower or may not fit on some low-end devices.

Model performancehigher is better

Native BF16 · TypeSafe: same 102-row subset · Jev: published result · browser builds are quantized

download / cache—starts only when you click load

model load—download and prepare

warmup—compile passes for both methods

Weights come from Hugging Face and remain in your browser cache. Inputs never leave this page. First load can take several minutes depending on the selected model, network and GPU.

01 / decision

Give it a real choice

Try an example

Both paths receive the same decision. One reads option probabilities directly; the other asks the model to write its option probabilities as JSON text.

your decisionstate + question + options

→

same local modelMiniCPM5 · 2B

↗
↘

read logitsA…T probabilities

write tokens{options + probabilities}

02A / direct readout

Choice probabilities

no decoding

Read the model’s choice logits and normalize only across the options you supplied.

waiting for a run

total
—

input
—

output
1 readout

02B / generation

JSON probabilities

token by token

Ask the model to estimate the same displayed-option distribution and write it as JSON. Watch every token arrive.

waiting for a run

first token
—

total
—

input
—

output
—

measured wall-time ratiorun it on your GPU

The methods run sequentially on the same loaded model so they do not contend for one GPU. Direct runs first, then generation.

What these numbers do—and do not—mean

Conditional probabilities. Direct scores are a softmax over only the displayed option tokens. They are not calibrated confidence and do not include every answer the model might prefer.

Local model tiers. The phone model trades accuracy for size. MiniCPM is the desktop default. The 4B option needs substantially more memory. None is claimed to match Jev.

Real local timing. Setup, warmup, prompt preparation, direct execution, first generated token and generation completion are timed with performance.now(). No canned results appear.

Quantized weights. The demo uses pinned GGUF builds through wllama. Quantization can change both quality and speed.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com