| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $5.00e-7 per prompt token | $3.00e-6 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 8 decomposed | 8 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Implements a two-stage reasoning architecture where the model first generates explicit chain-of-thought reasoning tokens (visible to users and developers) before producing final answers. The reasoning phase uses reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to learn when and how to reason deeply, with a 671B parameter base model and 37B active parameters enabling efficient inference. This differs from o1-style hidden reasoning by exposing the full reasoning process, allowing developers to audit, debug, and understand model decision-making.
Unique: Open-sourced reasoning tokens with full visibility into intermediate steps, trained via RLHF to learn when deep reasoning is necessary, contrasting with proprietary o1 models that hide reasoning behind a black box. The 37B active parameters enable efficient inference while maintaining reasoning quality through mixture-of-experts or sparse activation patterns.
vs alternatives: Provides equivalent reasoning performance to OpenAI o1 at lower cost while exposing the full reasoning process for auditability, versus o1's hidden reasoning which prevents inspection but may be faster for simple queries.
Leverages a 671B parameter architecture trained on diverse reasoning tasks to solve problems spanning mathematics, physics, logic puzzles, code debugging, and multi-step planning. The model uses reinforcement learning to develop robust reasoning strategies that generalize across domains, with active parameter selection (37B active) enabling efficient routing of computation to relevant reasoning pathways. Handles problems requiring 5-20+ step logical chains without degradation in coherence or correctness.
Unique: Trained via reinforcement learning to dynamically allocate reasoning effort based on problem complexity, using sparse activation (37B active of 671B total) to route computation efficiently. This contrasts with fixed-depth reasoning in standard LLMs and enables o1-level performance on diverse problem types without proportional computational overhead.
vs alternatives: Matches o1's reasoning quality on complex problems while being open-source and exposing reasoning tokens, versus GPT-4 which lacks systematic reasoning depth and o1 which hides the reasoning process entirely.
Exposes the R1 0528 model through OpenRouter's REST API with support for both streaming (Server-Sent Events) and batch inference modes. Implements standard OpenAI-compatible chat completion endpoints with support for system prompts, temperature control, max tokens, and token counting. Streaming mode enables real-time reasoning token delivery as they're generated, while batch mode optimizes throughput for non-latency-sensitive workloads.
Unique: OpenRouter's abstraction layer provides unified API access to R1 0528 with transparent pricing, rate limiting, and fallback routing to alternative models if needed. Streaming mode specifically exposes reasoning tokens in real-time via SSE, enabling interactive reasoning visualization that proprietary APIs may not support.
vs alternatives: More accessible than self-hosted R1 deployment while offering better cost transparency than direct OpenAI API; streaming reasoning tokens provide advantages over o1's hidden reasoning for interactive applications.
Unlike proprietary o1, DeepSeek R1 0528 is open-sourced with publicly available model weights, enabling developers to run inference locally, fine-tune on custom datasets, or audit the model architecture. The 671B parameter model with 37B active parameters can be deployed on high-end GPUs (8x H100s or equivalent) or quantized for smaller hardware. Supports standard inference frameworks (vLLM, TensorRT-LLM, Ollama) with reproducible outputs given fixed random seeds.
Unique: Fully open-sourced weights enable local deployment and fine-tuning, contrasting with o1 which is proprietary and API-only. The sparse activation architecture (37B active of 671B) enables quantization and optimization strategies that maintain reasoning quality while reducing deployment costs compared to dense 671B models.
vs alternatives: Provides o1-equivalent reasoning with full model transparency and local deployment options, versus o1's proprietary API-only access and hidden weights; enables fine-tuning and auditing impossible with closed models.
Applies chain-of-thought reasoning to code generation and debugging tasks, producing not just code but explicit reasoning about correctness, edge cases, and potential bugs. The model reasons through algorithm selection, data structure choices, and error handling before generating code, enabling detection of subtle logic errors that standard code generation misses. Supports multiple programming languages and can reason about system-level concerns like concurrency, memory safety, and performance.
Unique: Reasoning-first approach to code generation where the model explicitly reasons about correctness, edge cases, and design trade-offs before producing code. This contrasts with standard code generation (Copilot, Claude) which produces code directly without visible reasoning, enabling detection of subtle bugs through explicit logical analysis.
vs alternatives: Produces more correct code for complex algorithms than Copilot or GPT-4 by reasoning through edge cases explicitly; slower than standard generation but catches bugs that would require manual review in alternatives.
Uses chain-of-thought reasoning to verify mathematical proofs step-by-step, identify logical gaps, and derive new conclusions from premises. The model can work with formal notation, symbolic reasoning, and multi-step logical chains, producing intermediate steps that can be checked for correctness. Supports both proof verification (checking existing proofs) and proof generation (deriving new results from axioms and lemmas).
Unique: Applies reinforcement-learning-trained reasoning to mathematical proof tasks, producing explicit step-by-step reasoning that can be audited for logical correctness. Unlike standard LLMs that generate plausible-sounding proofs, R1's reasoning approach enables identification of subtle logical gaps through visible intermediate steps.
vs alternatives: More reliable than GPT-4 for proof verification due to explicit reasoning; slower than specialized proof assistants (Lean, Coq) but more accessible and requires less formal notation expertise.
Maintains reasoning context across multiple turns in a conversation, enabling the model to build on previous reasoning steps and refine conclusions iteratively. Each turn generates new reasoning tokens that reference and build upon prior analysis, allowing developers to guide the reasoning process through follow-up questions and corrections. The model can revise earlier conclusions if new information contradicts prior reasoning.
Unique: Reasoning tokens persist across conversation turns, enabling visible refinement of reasoning as new information is introduced. This contrasts with standard LLMs where reasoning is implicit and hidden, making it impossible to audit how conclusions change with new context.
vs alternatives: Enables interactive reasoning refinement impossible with o1 (which hides reasoning) or standard LLMs (which lack systematic reasoning); slower than single-turn inference but more effective for complex problem-solving requiring iteration.
Implements mixture-of-experts or sparse activation patterns where only 37B of the 671B parameters are active per inference step, reducing computational cost and latency compared to dense 671B models while maintaining reasoning quality. The sparse routing mechanism learns which parameter subsets are relevant for different problem types, enabling efficient allocation of compute. This architecture enables deployment on smaller GPU clusters than would be required for dense models of equivalent quality.
Unique: Sparse activation architecture (37B active of 671B total) enables o1-equivalent reasoning quality at significantly lower computational cost than dense models. This contrasts with o1 which uses dense inference, and with standard sparse models which lack reasoning capabilities.
vs alternatives: Provides better cost-per-reasoning-quality ratio than o1 or dense 671B models; enables deployment on smaller infrastructure than alternatives while maintaining reasoning depth.
Generates natural language responses mimicking Claude 3 Sonnet/Opus writing style through fine-tuning on Qwen2.5 72B base model. Uses instruction-tuned architecture to follow complex multi-step prompts while maintaining coherent, well-structured prose with appropriate tone and formality levels. The model learns stylistic patterns from Claude outputs during fine-tuning rather than using retrieval or prompt engineering alone.
Unique: Fine-tuned specifically on Claude 3 Sonnet/Opus output patterns rather than generic instruction-tuning, creating a style-matched alternative that preserves Anthropic's prose characteristics while running on Qwen2.5's 72B architecture
vs alternatives: Offers Claude-quality writing at lower cost than Anthropic's API and with more deployment flexibility than proprietary models, though with less transparency about training methodology than fully open-source alternatives like Llama
Maintains coherent multi-turn dialogue through transformer-based attention mechanisms that track conversation history and speaker context. The instruction-tuned architecture processes entire conversation threads as input, allowing the model to reference previous exchanges, maintain consistent character/tone, and resolve pronouns and references across turns without explicit memory structures.
Unique: Inherits Qwen2.5's instruction-tuning approach to conversation, which explicitly trains on multi-turn formats with clear role markers, enabling better context resolution than models trained primarily on single-turn examples
vs alternatives: Simpler integration than systems requiring external memory stores (RAG, vector DBs) since context is handled natively, but less sophisticated than models with explicit memory architectures or retrieval-augmented approaches for very long conversations
Magnum v4 72B scores higher at 25/100 vs DeepSeek: R1 0528 at 23/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Generates code snippets and technical explanations by applying instruction-tuned patterns learned from fine-tuning on Claude outputs. The model understands code context from natural language descriptions, can generate multiple programming languages, and provides explanations alongside code. Implementation relies on transformer attention over code tokens and learned associations between natural language intent and code patterns.
Unique: Fine-tuned on Claude's code generation outputs, capturing Anthropic's approach to code explanation and safety considerations (e.g., error handling suggestions) rather than pure code-to-code translation
vs alternatives: Provides better code explanations and safety context than specialized code models like CodeLlama, but likely slower and less specialized than models fine-tuned specifically on code-only datasets
Applies learned chain-of-thought reasoning patterns from Claude fine-tuning to break down complex problems into steps. The model generates intermediate reasoning steps before final answers, using transformer attention to track logical dependencies across reasoning chains. This is achieved through instruction-tuning on examples where Claude explicitly shows reasoning work.
Unique: Inherits Claude's explicit chain-of-thought training approach, which emphasizes showing reasoning work as part of the output rather than reasoning internally, making reasoning patterns visible and auditable
vs alternatives: More transparent reasoning than models without explicit chain-of-thought training, but less specialized than models fine-tuned specifically on mathematical reasoning datasets or formal logic
Condenses long-form text into summaries while preserving key information, using attention mechanisms to identify salient content and instruction-tuned patterns for summary formatting. The model learns from Claude's summarization style, which emphasizes clarity and hierarchical organization of information. Works by attending to important tokens and generating compressed representations.
Unique: Fine-tuned on Claude's summarization outputs, which emphasize hierarchical structure and clear topic organization rather than extractive summarization, producing more readable abstracts
vs alternatives: Better prose quality and readability than extractive summarization tools, but less specialized than models fine-tuned specifically on summarization tasks or using dedicated abstractive architectures
Executes complex, multi-part instructions by parsing task structure and maintaining execution context across steps. The instruction-tuned architecture learns to identify task boundaries, handle conditional logic (if-then patterns), and sequence operations correctly. Implementation relies on transformer attention to track task state and learned patterns from Claude's instruction-following training.
Unique: Trained on Claude's instruction-following patterns, which emphasize explicit acknowledgment of task structure and step-by-step execution reporting, making task progress transparent
vs alternatives: More reliable instruction-following than base models without instruction-tuning, but less specialized than models with explicit task planning architectures or reinforcement learning from human feedback on instruction compliance
Answers questions by understanding context, identifying relevant information, and generating coherent responses. Uses transformer attention to locate answer-relevant tokens and instruction-tuned patterns to format responses appropriately. The model learns from Claude's question-answering style, which emphasizes accuracy, nuance, and acknowledgment of uncertainty.
Unique: Fine-tuned on Claude's QA outputs, which emphasize acknowledging uncertainty, providing nuanced answers, and explaining reasoning rather than simple factual retrieval
vs alternatives: Better answer quality and nuance than retrieval-based QA systems, but without external knowledge bases or web search, limited to training data knowledge unlike RAG-augmented systems
Generates creative text including stories, essays, marketing copy, and other original content by learning stylistic patterns from Claude's creative outputs. The model uses transformer attention to maintain narrative coherence, character consistency, and thematic development across generated text. Fine-tuning captures Claude's approach to balancing creativity with clarity.
Unique: Fine-tuned on Claude's creative outputs, which balance imaginative storytelling with clarity and coherence, producing more readable creative content than models trained purely on internet text
vs alternatives: Better prose quality and narrative coherence than base language models, but less specialized than models fine-tuned specifically on creative writing datasets or with explicit story structure training