Complements To Your Work

#7
by tcclaviger - opened

Tess, does indeed, exhibit improved depth of knowledge, slightly better adherence to instructions, and frankly better task when doing front end tasks.

I've been running some very long document topic/relationship extraction on it as a head to head against the base 27B and Tess routinely picks topics that are more aligned. It gets fed a set of 600 topics and very long documents, some over 300k tokens (I run 1/2 mil context length), and is outperforming 27B, with thusfar zero incorrectly formatted JSON output.

I frequently task agentic chat with webpage generation as outputs, things like... get me the news of the day return in a web page, get the public sentiment about GPT 5.6 dropping and build me a web page presenting it all, etc. I use it as a test of tool adherence, tool calling, judgement, and front end design preference, by leaving it open ended on purpose, the model's trained behavior biases surface.

Tess does better on these tasks than base 27B, by a longshot. The gap from base 27B to Tess is like the gap from 35B to 27B from what I can find.

Another task, long running many turn, 150+ tool call programming task in the strictest possible environment for code quality, standards etc. Most models cannot complete it at all, getting stuck in file read/think/edit/fail tests/lint loops. 27B can complete it about 1/2 the time. Tess has nailed it each time, and, more importantly, the output it gives is closer to the frontier models in quality.

So, well done, Tess is the first 27B I have found that is not inherently broken in some deep and subtle way making it unusable.

During these extraction tasks its...fast...MTP doing the lords work 🤩

image

Thanks man, appreciate the feedback! I'm just getting started again (took a two year break to touch some grass, lol) -- expect a lot more coming. Just find me on Twitter.

migtissera changed discussion status to closed

Sign up or log in to comment