Contrastive Language Models score a state against a set of candidate actions with a contrastive objective. Two projection heads on frozen Qwen3-8B embeddings, trained with InfoNCE; clm-serve maps Choice, Score and Noul onto candidate ranking.
One of the earliest Jev-shaped scorers. A sequence-classification head on Qwen3.5-4B-Base scores each (state, question, option) triple and softmaxes per question. Non-commercial licence.
Decides
choice, score, noul, rank, classify, route
choice, score, noul, classify
Architecture
clm
scorer
Fine-tuned from
qwen/qwen3-8b
qwen/qwen3.5-4b-base
License
apache-2.0
cc-by-nc-4.0
Availability
Open weights
Open weights
Hosted by
—
—
Input price
—
—
Decision accuracy
—
70.7%
Calibration error
—
0.044
Valid action rate
—
—
Median latency
—
112 ms
p95 latency
—
—
Evaluation suite
Figures are from each model’s manifest; accuracy and latency are what the publishers report, on their own suites and hardware. Add a third model.
Questions
What is the difference between clm and system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer?
clm is from Contrastive-LM and system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer from pngwn. Both have open weights you can download and run. Both answer choice, score, noul and classify questions. Only clm answers rank and route. system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer is the smaller model, at 4.0B parameters to 8.0B. clm is licensed apache-2.0; system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer, cc-by-nc-4.0.
Which is more accurate, clm or system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer?
Only system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer publishes an accuracy figure (70.7% on author-reported); clm does not, so there is no comparison to make without your own test.
Which is cheaper, clm or system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer?
clm: Free (open weights). system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer: Free (open weights). Open weights cost nothing per call beyond your own hardware.
Can I run clm or system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer locally?
Yes, both: systemone pull contrastive-lm/clm and systemone pull pngwn/system-one-qwen3-5-4b-scorer download the weights.
