| 0 |
| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $9.00e-8 per prompt token | $6.00e-7 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 8 decomposed | 11 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Executes multi-step research tasks over extended reasoning horizons by decomposing complex information-seeking goals into sub-queries, iteratively refining search strategies, and synthesizing findings across multiple sources. Uses an agentic loop architecture where the model decides when to search, what to search for, and when sufficient evidence has been gathered to answer the original query, enabling autonomous deep research without human intervention between steps.
Unique: Uses a 30B parameter model with 3B active tokens per inference step, enabling efficient long-horizon agentic loops without the computational cost of full-parameter activation. The sparse activation pattern (MoE-style) allows the model to maintain extended reasoning chains while keeping inference latency competitive with smaller models.
vs alternatives: More efficient than full-parameter 30B models for research tasks due to sparse activation, and maintains deeper reasoning capability than 7B-13B models while avoiding the latency penalties of 70B+ parameter dense models.
The model autonomously generates search queries based on information gaps identified during reasoning, executes searches, evaluates results, and decides whether to refine the search strategy or proceed to synthesis. This differs from simple retrieval by having the model control the search loop — it determines query reformulation, decides when to pivot search strategy, and identifies when sufficient information has been gathered, implementing a feedback loop between reasoning and information retrieval.
Unique: Implements a closed-loop search strategy where the model's reasoning directly controls search execution and evaluation, rather than treating search as a separate tool invoked once. The model maintains state across search iterations and makes explicit decisions about strategy pivoting, enabling adaptive research workflows.
vs alternatives: More adaptive than static RAG systems that execute a single retrieval pass, and more transparent than black-box search ranking because the model's reasoning about search strategy is part of the output.
Aggregates information from multiple search results and sources, identifies contradictions or conflicting claims, and synthesizes a coherent answer by reasoning about source credibility, recency, and relevance. The model maintains awareness of source provenance throughout reasoning and explicitly addresses conflicts rather than simply merging results, producing a unified narrative that acknowledges uncertainty where sources disagree.
Unique: Maintains explicit source tracking throughout the reasoning process and treats conflict resolution as a first-class reasoning task rather than a post-hoc merge operation. The model's reasoning about why sources conflict is part of the output, not hidden in the synthesis process.
vs alternatives: More sophisticated than simple concatenation of search results, and more transparent than systems that silently pick one source — explicitly reasons about conflicts and explains resolution to the user.
Maintains coherent reasoning across extended context windows by using a mixture-of-experts (MoE) architecture where only 3 billion of 30 billion parameters activate per token, reducing computational overhead while preserving reasoning depth. This sparse activation pattern allows the model to process longer reasoning chains, maintain state across multiple research iterations, and synthesize information from numerous sources without the latency and memory penalties of dense full-parameter models.
Unique: Uses a 30B parameter MoE architecture with 3B active parameters per token, a design choice that balances reasoning capability with inference efficiency. This is distinct from dense 30B models and from smaller 7B-13B models — it achieves reasoning depth closer to 30B while maintaining latency closer to 7B.
vs alternatives: More efficient than dense 30B models for long-horizon tasks (lower latency, lower memory), and more capable than 7B-13B models for complex reasoning, making it a sweet spot for research-heavy applications.
Automatically breaks down complex, multi-faceted research questions into sub-tasks, executes them in a logical sequence, and combines results into a coherent final answer. The model identifies task dependencies, determines optimal execution order, and manages state across sub-tasks without explicit user guidance on decomposition strategy. This enables handling of queries that would normally require manual step-by-step prompting.
Unique: Implements autonomous task decomposition as part of the agentic reasoning loop, where the model decides how to break down complex queries without explicit user guidance. The decomposition is adaptive — if initial sub-tasks don't yield sufficient information, the model can revise the decomposition strategy.
vs alternatives: More flexible than fixed prompt templates that require users to specify task structure, and more transparent than black-box planning systems because the model's decomposition reasoning is part of the output.
Streams research progress and intermediate reasoning steps to the user in real-time, allowing visibility into what searches are being executed, what information gaps are being identified, and how the model is synthesizing results. Rather than waiting for a final answer, users see the research process unfold, including search queries executed, results evaluated, and reasoning about next steps, enabling early intervention if the research direction is incorrect.
Unique: Exposes the agentic reasoning loop as a stream of intermediate steps rather than hiding it behind a final answer. Users see search decisions, result evaluations, and reasoning refinements in real-time, making the research process auditable and interactive.
vs alternatives: More transparent than models that only output final answers, and more interactive than batch research systems that require waiting for complete execution before seeing any results.
Automatically identifies gaps in the current research and generates follow-up questions that would deepen understanding or fill missing information. The model maintains awareness of what has been learned so far and what remains unclear, suggesting natural next questions that build on previous research rather than starting fresh. This enables continuous research refinement without users having to manually think of follow-up questions.
Unique: Generates follow-up questions as part of the agentic reasoning process, maintaining awareness of what has been learned and what remains unclear. Questions are contextual to the specific research conducted, not generic templates.
vs alternatives: More contextual than static question templates, and more proactive than systems that only answer questions posed by users — actively guides research direction.
Provides access to the Tongyi DeepResearch model through OpenRouter's unified API interface, enabling integration without direct Alibaba endpoint management. OpenRouter abstracts provider-specific details (authentication, rate limiting, error handling) behind a standard REST API, allowing developers to integrate the model using familiar HTTP patterns and switch providers without code changes. Supports streaming responses, token counting, and standard LLM API conventions.
Unique: Accessed through OpenRouter's unified API rather than direct Alibaba endpoints, providing provider abstraction and multi-provider support. This enables developers to treat Tongyi DeepResearch as one option among many research models without provider-specific integration code.
vs alternatives: More flexible than direct Alibaba API access because it supports provider switching, and more standardized than proprietary APIs because it follows OpenRouter's conventions.
GLM-4.5 uses a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture to dynamically route tokens through specialized expert networks based on input characteristics, enabling efficient processing of 128k-token contexts without proportional latency increases. The MoE design allows selective expert activation per token, reducing computational overhead while maintaining reasoning depth across extended conversations and multi-document analysis tasks typical of agent-based workflows.
Unique: Mixture-of-Experts routing specifically tuned for agent workloads rather than generic dense models; expert activation patterns are optimized for tool-use sequences and multi-step reasoning rather than general language tasks
vs alternatives: Outperforms dense models like GPT-4 Turbo on agent tasks within 128k context by routing computational budget to relevant experts, reducing latency and cost vs. models that process all tokens through identical layers
GLM-4.5 implements native function calling through a schema-based registry where tools are defined as JSON schemas with parameter constraints, type validation, and description metadata. The model learns to emit structured tool invocations that map directly to function signatures, enabling deterministic tool orchestration without post-processing or regex parsing. Integration with OpenRouter's API exposes this via standard function-calling parameters compatible with OpenAI's format.
Unique: Schema-based function calling is trained directly into the model weights rather than implemented as post-hoc decoding constraints, allowing the model to learn semantic relationships between tool purposes and input context during training
vs alternatives: More reliable than constraint-based function calling (e.g., Guidance, LMQL) because tool selection is learned rather than enforced, reducing parsing failures and enabling the model to reason about tool applicability
Z.ai: GLM 4.5 scores higher at 24/100 vs Tongyi DeepResearch 30B A3B at 23/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
GLM-4.5 can be used for batch inference through OpenRouter's API, enabling cost-optimized processing of large numbers of requests. Batch processing typically offers reduced pricing compared to real-time API calls and is suitable for non-urgent inference tasks. The model can process batches of prompts efficiently, with results returned after processing completes. This is valuable for agents running scheduled tasks or processing large datasets.
Unique: Batch processing is offered through OpenRouter's unified API rather than a separate batch service, enabling seamless switching between real-time and batch modes with the same client code
vs alternatives: More cost-effective than real-time API for high-volume inference; simpler than managing separate batch infrastructure because OpenRouter handles queuing and result delivery
GLM-4.5 maintains coherent conversation state across turns by encoding prior messages into a compressed representation that persists within the 128k context window. The model uses attention mechanisms to selectively retrieve relevant prior context, enabling agents to reference earlier decisions, tool results, and user preferences without explicit memory management. This is particularly effective for agent workflows where state accumulation (e.g., task progress, discovered facts) must inform subsequent actions.
Unique: Implicit memory management through attention-based context selection rather than explicit memory modules; the model learns which prior turns are relevant without separate retrieval or summarization steps
vs alternatives: More efficient than explicit memory systems (e.g., LangChain's ConversationBufferMemory) because attention is computed once during inference rather than requiring separate retrieval and summarization passes
GLM-4.5 generates code across 40+ programming languages by leveraging training data that includes diverse codebases and syntax patterns. The model understands language-specific idioms, library conventions, and structural patterns (e.g., async/await in JavaScript, type hints in Python, generics in Java) without explicit language-specific modules. Generation is context-aware, respecting indentation, existing code style, and project conventions when completing or extending code snippets.
Unique: Language-agnostic code generation trained on diverse codebases rather than language-specific fine-tuning; the model generalizes syntax patterns across languages, enabling reasonable code generation even for less common languages
vs alternatives: Broader language coverage than specialized models like Codex (which emphasizes Python/JavaScript) but lower quality on niche languages compared to language-specific models; better for polyglot teams than single-language specialists
GLM-4.5 is trained on extensive technical documentation, API references, and code examples, enabling it to understand and reason about complex technical concepts, library APIs, and system architectures. The model can parse API schemas (OpenAPI, GraphQL, Protocol Buffers), understand parameter constraints and type systems, and generate code that correctly uses APIs based on documentation. This is particularly valuable for agent workflows that must interact with external systems.
Unique: Semantic understanding of API schemas and documentation is learned from training data rather than implemented as a separate schema parser; the model reasons about API semantics holistically
vs alternatives: More flexible than code-generation-only models because it understands API semantics and can reason about correctness; better than generic LLMs for technical tasks because training includes extensive API documentation
GLM-4.5 can generate responses that explicitly show reasoning steps, enabling transparency into how conclusions were reached. When prompted with chain-of-thought patterns, the model generates intermediate reasoning steps before final answers, making it suitable for applications requiring explainability or verification. This is implemented through training on reasoning-annotated data and prompt patterns that encourage step-by-step decomposition.
Unique: Chain-of-thought reasoning is trained directly into the model rather than implemented as a decoding strategy; the model learns to generate reasoning steps as part of its core training objective
vs alternatives: More natural and coherent reasoning steps than prompt-injection approaches (e.g., appending 'think step by step') because reasoning is learned as a first-class capability
GLM-4.5 supports multiple languages (Chinese, English, and others) with training that enables cross-lingual reasoning — understanding concepts expressed in one language and reasoning about them in another. The model can translate, summarize, and reason across languages without language-specific degradation. This is particularly valuable for global applications and agents that must operate in multilingual environments.
Unique: Cross-lingual reasoning is learned from multilingual training data rather than implemented as separate language-specific models; the model develops a shared representation across languages
vs alternatives: More efficient than maintaining separate models per language because a single model handles all languages; better for cross-lingual reasoning than language-specific models because the shared representation enables concept transfer
+3 more capabilities