amos-1-medium vs tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M)
amos-1-medium and tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M) have no measured difference in accuracy, calibration or cost in our data yet.
| Spec | amos-1-medium | tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M) |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Scira (mukaddamzaid) | tasksource |
| Decision Index score | — | 17.6 |
| Calibration error (ECE) | — | 0.069 |
| Median latency (p50) | — | 14 ms |
| Cost per 1,000 decisions | — | — |
| Parameters | — | 149M |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| Question types | Choice (one of N options), Score (ordered rubric), Yes / no | Choice (one of N options), Score (ordered rubric), Yes / no |
| Mechanism | Decoder LM with a decision readout | Cross-encoder (NLI) |
| License | apache-2.0 | apache-2.0 |
FAQ
Is amos-1-medium or tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M) more accurate?
At least one of the two has no Jev Decision Index score yet, so their accuracy cannot be compared here.
Which is better calibrated, amos-1-medium or tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M)?
No calibration difference between amos-1-medium and tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M) is recorded yet.
Is amos-1-medium or tasksource Decider nano v4 (150M) cheaper per 1,000 decisions?
A hosted price is not recorded for both models; open-weight models cost the compute you run them on.
Cost per 1,000 decisions assumes 200 input tokens per decision. Pricing is indicative — confirm with the provider before production use. Highlighted values indicate the better figure for that row.