Instructions to use arjhinety/OpenGrad-Qwen3.5-2B-M0-ABL-MinusXLAM-FixedCompute with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.
- Libraries
- Transformers
How to use arjhinety/OpenGrad-Qwen3.5-2B-M0-ABL-MinusXLAM-FixedCompute with Transformers:
# Load model directly from transformers import AutoModel model = AutoModel.from_pretrained("arjhinety/OpenGrad-Qwen3.5-2B-M0-ABL-MinusXLAM-FixedCompute", device_map="auto") - Notebooks
- Google Colab
- Kaggle
OpenGrad β Qwen3.5-2B, joint xLAM + CALL_PREDICTION removal (fixed-compute)
Full-parameter SFT of Qwen/Qwen3.5-2B on Canonical-v2 with xLAM removed, training for the
reference's 2,400-step budget. Produced by OpenGrad.
Research artifact, not a production model. Published because the experiment's whole point is a negative result that is only checkable if the weights behind it are available.
What this experiment actually removed
Canonical-v2 maps xLAM to every CALL_PREDICTION record and the other three sources to
COMPLETE_TRAJECTORY. Removing xLAM therefore removed a source and the corpus's entire
call-prediction supervision channel at the same time:
this model measures the effect of removing xLAM together with the
CALL_PREDICTIONchannel.
It is not a pure xLAM-content ablation, and no xLAM-specific causal claim can be based on
it. Source identity and supervision type are perfectly aligned in this corpus. Separating them
would need another evidence-backed CALL_PREDICTION source.
Results (confirmatory partition, 1,277 examples, scored once)
| run | call_f1 |
precision | recall | over_call | clarify | unsupp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B0 (untrained) | 0.6264 | 0.4618 | 0.9735 | 0.6238 | 0.1186 | 0.0177 |
| reference (full corpus) @1800 | 0.7470 | 0.7350 | 0.7594 | 0.1505 | 0.7682 | 0.5430 |
| this arm (fixed-compute) @1200 | 0.6030 | 0.7893 | 0.4879 | 0.0716 | 0.8059 | 0.6026 |
| matched-exposure arm @1060 | 0.5557 | 0.8067 | 0.4238 | 0.0558 | 0.8194 | 0.6203 |
Removing the joint source/channel drops recall far below both the reference and B0 while precision rises and over-calling falls to a small fraction. The models become conservative but stop recalling the calls they should make β the direction the missing supervision predicts.
The arm that trains more (this one: 2,400 steps, ~1.53Γ the reference's passes over its corpus) does better than the matched-exposure arm. That is consistent with the recall loss tracking the missing supervision, but it does not rule out exposure. Batches are token-budgeted, so steps do not hold supervised tokens fixed: the matched-exposure arm logged 6,743,788 supervised tokens against the reference's 5,678,531 (1.19Γ, not ~1.0Γ), and this arm 7,683,301. The metrics above come from checkpoints that saw fewer supervised tokens than the reference's selected checkpoint: 3.80M here at 1200 and 3.36M for the matched arm at 1060, against 4.27M for the reference at 1800. "Exposure does not explain the result" is therefore not supported as stated. The two arms are one experiment and must be read together.
Honest limits
Not a promotion. Every checkpoint of both arms is REJECTED on regression.call_recall
against B0 (every matched-arm DEV checkpoint and fixed-arm 1800/2400 also fail
call_f1_retention). Every checkpoint of the reference run is rejected too, its checkpoint 600
on over-call alone. The gate was left exactly as written.
Single seed. A small between-arm difference is a finding to replicate, not a settled result.
Provenance. The matched-exposure arm was launched at 12:49 UTC on 2026-09-11 from commit
500cb4e with uncommitted changes (git_dirty: true in experiment.json and events.jsonl).
0807fa3 is the 13:26 UTC commit that recorded the finished run, not the launch commit. This
arm's own run_start event records commit 95a8225 with git_dirty: true, while its
experiment.json records git_dirty: false.
Some behaviours are unmeasured. Tool-selection accuracy, argument validity and schema validity are not computed; their absence is not a zero. The evaluation population has no direct-answer examples.
Checkpoints
All four retained checkpoints are published under their step: checkpoint-600, checkpoint-1200
(the DEV-selected one), checkpoint-1800, checkpoint-2400. Selection used the 2,373-example DEV
partition and the rule frozen before the run; the confirmatory partition was scored once, on
checkpoint-1200 only.
Intended use
Research artifact. Not safety-tuned, not aligned, not for autonomous tool use. It inherits the limitations of its public training sources, including synthetic data and unverified tool invocations, and it will behave poorly outside the decision-boundary behaviour it was trained for.