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.
Standard Thinking's decision model. Ministral 3 8B with a merged LoRA, served through stock SGLang and an open jev-adapter that exposes /v1/systemone and scores the supplied options in one forward pass with per-type temperatures.
Decides
noul, classify
choice, score, noul, classify, route
Architecture
span
standard-one
Fine-tuned from
—
mistralai/ministral-3-8b-instruct-2512-bf16
License
proprietary
apache-2.0
Availability
Hosted API
Open weights + hosted API
Hosted by
Respan
Standard Thinking
Input price
$0.020/MTok
—
Decision accuracy
—
71.1%
Calibration error
—
—
Valid action rate
—
—
Median latency
—
25.8 ms
p95 latency
—
41.9 ms
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 span-01 and standard-one?
span-01 is from Respan and standard-one from Standard Thinking. span-01 is only available as a hosted API; standard-one has open weights and a hosted API. Both answer noul and classify questions. Only standard-one answers choice, score and route. span-01 is licensed proprietary; standard-one, apache-2.0.
Which is more accurate, span-01 or standard-one?
Only standard-one publishes an accuracy figure (71.1% on typed-decisions suite, 400 cases / 2,000 decisions (maker's served run, v2)); span-01 does not, so there is no comparison to make without your own test.
Which is cheaper, span-01 or standard-one?
span-01: $0.02 / $0 per 1M. standard-one: Hosted, price not published, or free to self-host. Open weights cost nothing per call beyond your own hardware.
Can I run span-01 or standard-one locally?
standard-one yes — systemone pull standard-thinking/standard-one downloads its weights. The other is only served as a hosted API.
