Frontier Infra's open decision model. A LoRA merged into Qwen3.8-27B (thinking off) that answers one typed question per forward pass with a probability over the option labels, served through AINode's TypeSafe-compatible /v1/systemone.
Respan's behaviour-scoring model for evals, guardrails and monitoring. For each plain-language behaviour you define, it reads a conversation or agent trace and returns the probability the behaviour is present, absent or not observable, in one forward pass.
Decides
choice, score, noul, classify, route
noul, classify
Architecture
jebadiah
span
Fine-tuned from
qwen/qwen3.8-27b
—
License
apache-2.0
proprietary
Availability
Open weights
Hosted API
Hosted by
—
Respan
Input price
—
$0.020/MTok
Decision accuracy
86.6%
—
Calibration error
0.113
—
Valid action rate
—
—
Median latency
—
—
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 jebadiah and span-01?
jebadiah is from Frontier Infra and span-01 from Respan. jebadiah has open weights you can download and run; span-01 is only available as a hosted API. Both answer noul and classify questions. Only jebadiah answers choice, score and route. jebadiah is licensed apache-2.0; span-01, proprietary.
Which is more accurate, jebadiah or span-01?
Only jebadiah publishes an accuracy figure (86.6% on JevBench public set (231 items), maker's run with the v1.4.2 harness; ECE on the hard tier); span-01 does not, so there is no comparison to make without your own test.
Which is cheaper, jebadiah or span-01?
jebadiah: Free (open weights). span-01: $0.02 / $0 per 1M. Open weights cost nothing per call beyond your own hardware.
Can I run jebadiah or span-01 locally?
jebadiah yes — systemone pull frontier-infra/jebadiah downloads its weights. The other is only served as a hosted API.
JevBench public set (231 items), maker's run with the v1.4.2 harness; ECE on the hard tier
