Z.ai: GLM 5 ranks higher at 24/100 vs AlfredPros: CodeLLaMa 7B Instruct Solidity at 21/100. Capability-level comparison backed by match graph evidence from real search data.
| Feature | AlfredPros: CodeLLaMa 7B Instruct Solidity | Z.ai: GLM 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Model | Model |
| UnfragileRank | 21/100 | 24/100 |
| Adoption | 0 | 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $8.00e-7 per prompt token | $6.00e-7 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 5 decomposed | 12 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Generates Solidity smart contract code from natural language descriptions and prompts using a 7B parameter Code LLaMA model fine-tuned specifically for Solidity syntax and patterns. The model was trained via 4-bit QLoRA (Quantized Low-Rank Adaptation) using the PEFT library, enabling efficient parameter updates on a subset of weights while maintaining full model capability. This approach reduces memory footprint during inference while preserving the model's ability to understand Solidity-specific idioms, security patterns, and contract structures learned during fine-tuning.
Unique: Fine-tuned specifically on Solidity code using 4-bit QLoRA via PEFT library, enabling a lightweight 7B model to generate Solidity-idiomatic code with domain-specific pattern recognition that general-purpose Code LLaMA lacks. The quantization approach reduces inference latency and memory requirements compared to full-precision models while maintaining Solidity-specific knowledge.
vs alternatives: Smaller and faster than GPT-4 or Claude for Solidity generation while maintaining Solidity-specific accuracy; more specialized than general Code LLaMA but more cost-effective and privacy-preserving than cloud-based alternatives for teams with on-premise or edge deployment needs.
Completes partial Solidity code snippets by predicting the next tokens based on context, leveraging the instruction-tuned variant of Code LLaMA to understand Solidity syntax, function signatures, and common contract patterns. The model uses causal language modeling (next-token prediction) with attention mechanisms trained on Solidity code to generate contextually appropriate continuations, including function bodies, state variable declarations, and contract logic.
Unique: Instruction-tuned variant of Code LLaMA specifically adapted for Solidity, enabling it to understand and complete Solidity-specific patterns (modifiers, events, storage layouts) that general code completion models treat as generic syntax.
vs alternatives: More Solidity-aware than generic Code LLaMA completion; lighter-weight and faster than GPT-4 Turbo for real-time IDE integration while maintaining domain-specific accuracy.
Analyzes existing Solidity code and generates natural language explanations, documentation, and inline comments. The instruction-tuned model reads Solidity code as input and produces human-readable descriptions of contract logic, function behavior, state transitions, and security considerations. This leverages the model's training on code-to-text pairs and instruction-following capability to produce contextually appropriate explanations at multiple levels of detail.
Unique: Instruction-tuned specifically on Solidity code-documentation pairs, enabling it to generate Solidity-idiomatic explanations that reference contract-specific concepts (state variables, modifiers, events) rather than generic programming constructs.
vs alternatives: More Solidity-aware than general-purpose documentation generators; faster and more cost-effective than hiring human auditors for initial documentation, though not a replacement for security review.
Analyzes Solidity code and suggests refactoring improvements, gas optimizations, and code quality enhancements. The model uses its training on Solidity patterns and best practices to identify opportunities for simplification, gas reduction, and adherence to Solidity conventions. This is implemented via prompt-based instruction following, where the model receives code and a refactoring directive and generates improved versions with explanations of changes.
Unique: Fine-tuned on Solidity-specific optimization patterns including gas-efficient storage layouts, function selector optimization, and EVM-aware code patterns that general refactoring models do not understand.
vs alternatives: More Solidity-specific than generic code refactoring tools; faster and cheaper than manual auditor review while providing immediate suggestions, though requires validation against actual gas benchmarks.
Identifies potential security issues and suggests secure coding patterns in Solidity code by analyzing contract logic against known vulnerability patterns and best practices. The model uses its training on secure Solidity patterns to flag common issues like reentrancy risks, unchecked external calls, and improper access control, then suggests remediation patterns. This is implemented via instruction-following prompts that ask the model to analyze code for security concerns.
Unique: Trained on Solidity-specific security patterns and known vulnerabilities (reentrancy, overflow, access control), enabling it to recognize EVM-specific attack vectors that general security analysis tools miss.
vs alternatives: More Solidity-aware than generic static analysis tools; faster and cheaper than manual security review but not a replacement for professional audits; complements automated tools like Slither by providing pattern-based reasoning.
GLM-5 processes extended code contexts (supporting multi-file projects and large codebases) while maintaining semantic understanding of system architecture through attention mechanisms optimized for code structure. The model uses specialized tokenization for programming languages and maintains coherence across thousands of tokens of code context, enabling generation of complex features that respect existing patterns and dependencies.
Unique: Engineered specifically for complex systems design with attention mechanisms tuned for code structure and architectural patterns, rather than generic language modeling — enables understanding of system-wide dependencies and design constraints across extended contexts
vs alternatives: Outperforms general-purpose models on large-scale programming tasks because it's optimized for architectural coherence and long-horizon code generation rather than treating code as generic text
GLM-5 supports extended reasoning chains for agentic workflows through structured prompt patterns that enable step-by-step decomposition of complex tasks. The model can maintain state across multiple turns, reason about tool outputs, and make decisions about next actions — designed for long-horizon agent loops where the model must plan, execute, observe, and adapt across dozens of steps.
Unique: Explicitly engineered for long-horizon agent workflows with architectural patterns optimized for extended reasoning chains, rather than single-turn tool calling — maintains coherence and decision quality across dozens of reasoning steps
vs alternatives: Better suited for multi-step agentic tasks than general-purpose models because reasoning and tool-use patterns are baked into the training, not bolted on via prompt engineering
Z.ai: GLM 5 scores higher at 24/100 vs AlfredPros: CodeLLaMa 7B Instruct Solidity at 21/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
GLM-5 analyzes code for performance bottlenecks and suggests optimization strategies through understanding of algorithmic complexity, memory management, and system-level performance patterns. The model can identify inefficient algorithms, suggest data structure improvements, and recommend caching or parallelization strategies — enabling targeted performance improvements with understanding of trade-offs.
Unique: Understands algorithmic complexity and system-level performance patterns, enabling identification of fundamental bottlenecks and suggestion of targeted optimizations rather than micro-optimizations
vs alternatives: Identifies more fundamental performance issues than profiling tools because it understands algorithmic complexity and can suggest architectural improvements, not just code-level optimizations
GLM-5 generates comprehensive API specifications, including endpoint definitions, request/response schemas, error handling, and usage examples through understanding of API design best practices and REST/GraphQL patterns. The model can produce OpenAPI/Swagger specifications, generate API documentation, and suggest design improvements — enabling rapid API specification and documentation.
Unique: Generates comprehensive API specifications that follow REST/GraphQL best practices and include error handling, authentication, and usage examples — not just endpoint definitions
vs alternatives: Produces more complete and best-practice-aligned API specifications than simple code-to-spec tools because it understands API design patterns and includes comprehensive documentation
GLM-5 generates high-quality technical documentation, design documents, and architectural specifications through training on expert-level technical writing patterns. The model understands domain-specific terminology, maintains consistency across long documents, and can generate structured documentation (API specs, RFC-style documents, architecture decision records) with appropriate technical depth and precision.
Unique: Trained on expert-level technical documentation patterns and domain-specific terminology, enabling generation of publication-ready documentation with appropriate technical depth rather than generic summaries
vs alternatives: Produces more technically precise and domain-aware documentation than general-purpose models because it understands architectural patterns, trade-offs, and expert writing conventions specific to software engineering
GLM-5 breaks down complex, ambiguous problems into structured task hierarchies and implementation plans through chain-of-thought reasoning patterns. The model can identify dependencies, suggest phased approaches, and generate detailed step-by-step plans for tackling large engineering challenges — useful for translating high-level requirements into actionable development roadmaps.
Unique: Optimized for expert-level problem decomposition through training on complex system design patterns and architectural reasoning, enabling generation of sophisticated multi-phase plans rather than simple task lists
vs alternatives: Produces more sophisticated and architecturally-aware plans than general-purpose models because it understands system design patterns, dependency relationships, and phased implementation strategies
GLM-5 analyzes code for quality issues, architectural violations, and design improvements through patterns learned from expert code review practices. The model can identify performance bottlenecks, suggest refactoring opportunities, flag architectural inconsistencies, and provide detailed feedback on code quality — going beyond simple linting to understand design intent and system-wide implications.
Unique: Trained on expert code review patterns and architectural reasoning, enabling detection of design issues and architectural violations rather than just syntax and style problems
vs alternatives: Provides more sophisticated architectural and design feedback than linting tools because it understands system-wide implications and expert design patterns, not just local code quality
GLM-5 translates code between programming languages while preserving semantic meaning and adapting to language-specific idioms. The model understands language-specific patterns, libraries, and best practices, enabling translation that produces idiomatic code rather than mechanical line-by-line conversions — useful for migrating systems across language ecosystems or supporting polyglot architectures.
Unique: Produces idiomatic, language-specific code rather than mechanical translations because it understands language-specific patterns, libraries, and best practices learned from diverse codebases
vs alternatives: Generates more idiomatic and maintainable translations than simple pattern-matching tools because it understands semantic equivalence and language-specific idioms
+4 more capabilities