| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 14 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Dense transformer decoder generating coherent multi-turn text outputs up to 8K tokens per inference call, trained on 18 trillion tokens with improved instruction-following resilience compared to Qwen2. Processes full 128K token context window for long-document understanding, role-play scenarios, and system prompt diversity without degradation. Supports structured prompting patterns including JSON schema specification and conditional generation based on system instructions.
Unique: Combines 128K context window with improved system prompt resilience through post-training on diverse instruction formats, enabling consistent role-play and conditional generation without prompt injection vulnerabilities that plague smaller models. Dense architecture avoids MoE routing overhead, providing predictable latency for production deployments.
vs alternatives: Larger context window than Llama 2 70B (4K) and comparable to Llama 3 (8K) while maintaining Apache 2.0 licensing for unrestricted commercial use, unlike some proprietary alternatives; instruction-following improvements over Qwen2 reduce system prompt override failures common in earlier open models.
Transformer-based code generation achieving 85+ on HumanEval benchmark through dense pretraining on 18 trillion tokens. Supports code completion, function generation, and multi-file context understanding for Python, JavaScript, Java, C++, and other major languages. Generates syntactically valid code with proper error handling patterns and can reason about code structure across 128K token context for refactoring and bug-fixing tasks.
Unique: Achieves HumanEval 85+ through dense 72B parameter architecture trained on 18 trillion tokens (vs. specialized Qwen2.5-Coder variants at 1.5B-32B), enabling complex multi-step code reasoning and refactoring across entire 128K context window without sparse routing overhead. General-purpose training allows seamless code-to-text and text-to-code transitions in single inference call.
vs alternatives: Outperforms Llama 2 70B (48.8% HumanEval) and matches Llama 3 70B (81.7%) while offering Apache 2.0 licensing; larger context window than CodeLlama 70B (4K) enables full-project refactoring without chunking, though specialized Qwen2.5-Coder 32B may be more efficient for code-only workloads.
Model weights available in multiple inference formats enabling optimization for diverse hardware and latency requirements. Supported through vLLM (paged attention for long-context), Ollama (simplified local deployment), Hugging Face Transformers (standard PyTorch), and community quantization formats (GGUF for CPU inference, AWQ/GPTQ for GPU quantization). Quantization reduces VRAM requirements by 50-75% with minimal quality loss, enabling deployment on consumer GPUs and edge devices.
Unique: Model weights available in multiple community-supported quantization formats (GGUF, AWQ, GPTQ) enabling 50-75% VRAM reduction with minimal quality loss. vLLM paged attention support optimizes long-context inference (128K tokens) through efficient memory management, reducing latency by 30-50% vs. standard attention.
vs alternatives: Quantization support comparable to Llama 2/3 but with larger model size (72B) enabling stronger performance at reduced precision. vLLM optimization provides latency improvements for long-context workloads; CPU inference via GGUF enables deployment on non-GPU hardware unavailable for proprietary API models.
Improved instruction-following (vs Qwen2) enables consistent role-play, system prompt adherence, and conditional behavior specification across diverse input patterns. Model resists prompt injection attempts and maintains defined system roles even with adversarial or off-topic user inputs. Supports complex multi-turn conversations with consistent character/persona definitions and context-aware response generation.
Unique: Post-training on diverse instruction formats improves system prompt resilience and role-play consistency compared to Qwen2, enabling reliable behavior specification without adversarial prompt injection. 128K context window allows full conversation histories and complex system prompt definitions within single inference call.
vs alternatives: More resilient to prompt injection than Llama 2 70B and comparable to Llama 3 while offering Apache 2.0 licensing. Lacks specialized safety training of Claude or GPT-4 but unified instruction-following approach avoids separate safety model requirements.
Specialized variant optimized for mathematical problem-solving with explicit support for multiple reasoning approaches: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) for step-by-step reasoning, Proof-of-Thought (PoT) for code-based mathematical computation, and Tool-Integrated Reasoning (TIR) for integration with external math tools. Available in 1.5B, 7B, and 72B sizes, enabling mathematical reasoning across different compute budgets.
Unique: Provides specialized mathematical reasoning variants with explicit support for three reasoning modes (CoT, PoT, TIR), enabling flexible problem-solving approaches. Available in multiple sizes (1.5B-72B) for different deployment scenarios while maintaining Apache 2.0 licensing.
vs alternatives: Offers explicit support for code-based mathematical reasoning (PoT) and tool integration (TIR) compared to general-purpose models, enabling more reliable mathematical problem-solving through multiple reasoning approaches.
Model weights distributed in formats compatible with multiple inference frameworks including vLLM, TensorRT-LLM, Ollama, and others, enabling flexible deployment across different hardware and software stacks. Supports both local deployment and cloud API access through Alibaba Cloud ModelStudio. Enables developers to choose deployment strategy based on latency, cost, and privacy requirements.
Unique: Provides model weights in formats compatible with multiple inference frameworks, enabling developers to choose deployment strategy without model-specific lock-in. Supports both local and cloud deployment through Alibaba Cloud ModelStudio.
vs alternatives: Offers greater deployment flexibility than proprietary models (GPT-4, Claude) by supporting multiple inference frameworks and local deployment, while providing cloud API option for teams preferring managed services.
Achieves 80+ on MATH benchmark through transformer architecture trained on 18 trillion tokens, with capability to generate step-by-step mathematical reasoning and symbolic computation. Supports chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting for multi-step problem decomposition, program-of-thought (PoT) for code-based calculations, and tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) for external calculator/solver integration. Handles algebraic manipulation, calculus, geometry, and number theory problems with explicit intermediate steps.
Unique: Integrates three distinct reasoning paradigms (CoT for symbolic reasoning, PoT for code-based computation, TIR for external tool orchestration) within single 72B dense model, enabling flexible problem-solving strategies without model switching. 128K context window allows full problem histories and solution verification within single inference call.
vs alternatives: Outperforms Llama 2 70B (significantly lower math performance) and matches Llama 3 70B on general benchmarks while offering specialized math reasoning patterns; Qwen2.5-Math 72B variant provides deeper specialization but general-purpose 72B enables seamless math-to-code-to-text transitions without model switching.
Supports generation in 29+ languages (Chinese, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Italian, Russian, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Arabic, and others) through unified transformer architecture trained on multilingual 18 trillion token corpus. Maintains instruction-following consistency across language boundaries and enables code-switching within single generation. Language-specific system prompts and role definitions work reliably without performance degradation.
Unique: Unified dense transformer trained on multilingual corpus maintains instruction-following consistency across 29+ languages without language-specific adapters or LoRA modules, enabling single-model deployment for global applications. Improved system prompt resilience (vs Qwen2) extends to multilingual contexts, reducing prompt injection vulnerabilities across language boundaries.
vs alternatives: Broader language support than Llama 2 70B (primarily English-focused) and comparable to Llama 3 while maintaining Apache 2.0 licensing; unified architecture avoids multi-model management overhead of language-specific deployments, though may sacrifice per-language performance optimization vs specialized models.
+6 more capabilities
Provides a standardized evaluation framework for code generation models that accepts generated code in 17 programming languages (C, C++, C#, Java, Kotlin, Go, Rust, Python, Ruby, PHP, JavaScript, Perl, Haskell, OCaml, Scala, D, Pascal) and validates correctness through actual execution against unit tests via the ExecEval Docker-based execution engine. Uses a centralized problem definition model with src_uid foreign keys linking generated code to shared problem descriptions and unittest_db.json, enabling consistent evaluation across language variants of the same problem.
Unique: Combines 25M training examples across 7,500 unique problems with an execution-based evaluation pipeline (ExecEval) that actually runs generated code in Docker containers against unit tests, rather than relying on static analysis or string matching. The src_uid linking system creates a normalized data model where problem descriptions and tests are stored once and referenced by all language variants, eliminating duplication and ensuring consistency.
vs alternatives: Larger scale (25M examples vs typical 10-100K) and true execution-based validation across more languages (17 vs 4-6) than HumanEval or CodeXGLUE, with explicit support for code translation and repair tasks beyond generation.
Implements a foreign key linking system where all task-specific datasets (program synthesis, code translation, APR, retrieval) reference shared problem definitions via src_uid identifiers. Problem descriptions and unit tests are stored once in centralized problem_descriptions.jsonl and unittest_db.json files, then linked by src_uid to avoid duplication. The Hugging Face datasets API automatically resolves these links during data loading, returning enriched DatasetDict objects with problem context pre-joined to task examples.
Unique: Uses a normalized relational data model (src_uid as foreign key) for a code benchmark, treating problem definitions as a separate entity layer rather than embedding them in each task dataset. This is more sophisticated than typical flat-file benchmark structures and enables consistent multi-task evaluation on identical problems.
xCodeEval scores higher at 67/100 vs Qwen2.5 72B at 58/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
vs alternatives: More efficient than duplicating problem descriptions across 7 task datasets (reduces storage by ~30-40%), and enables automatic link resolution via Hugging Face API unlike manual CSV joins in CodeXGLUE or HumanEval variants.
Provides a Python API for loading xCodeEval datasets from Hugging Face Hub (NTU-NLP-sg/xCodeEval) with automatic src_uid-based linking between task datasets and shared problem definitions. The datasets library handles data downloading, caching, and streaming, while the xCodeEval integration automatically joins task examples with problem_descriptions.jsonl and unittest_db.json using src_uid foreign keys. Returns DatasetDict objects with enriched examples ready for model training or evaluation.
Unique: Integrates xCodeEval with Hugging Face datasets library, providing automatic src_uid resolution and streaming support. Treats data loading as a first-class concern with built-in linking logic, rather than requiring manual JSON parsing.
vs alternatives: More convenient than manual Git LFS downloads because it handles caching and automatic linking, and integrates seamlessly with Hugging Face training pipelines vs custom data loaders.
Provides an alternative data access method using Git LFS for users who prefer direct file access or need selective dataset downloads. Supports cloning the repository with LFS disabled, then pulling specific task files or problem definitions on demand. Useful for custom processing pipelines or environments where Python/Hugging Face is not available, though requires manual src_uid linking to join task examples with problem definitions.
Unique: Provides Git LFS-based alternative to Hugging Face API, enabling direct file access and selective downloads. Requires manual src_uid linking but offers more control over data access patterns.
vs alternatives: More flexible than Hugging Face API for selective downloads and custom pipelines, but requires more manual work for src_uid linking and lacks automatic caching/streaming.
Implements a standardized three-phase evaluation pipeline (Phase 1: Generation, Phase 2: Execution, Phase 3: Metrics) that applies consistently across all 7 tasks (program synthesis, code translation, APR, tag classification, code compilation, NL-code retrieval, code-code retrieval). Phase 1 generates or retrieves code, Phase 2 executes it via ExecEval or computes retrieval metrics, and Phase 3 aggregates results into pass@k, MRR, NDCG, or other task-specific metrics. Enables direct comparison of model performance across tasks.
Unique: Defines a unified three-phase evaluation pipeline that applies to all 7 tasks, treating generation, execution, and metric computation as separate concerns. Enables consistent evaluation methodology across diverse task types (generation, translation, retrieval, classification).
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than task-specific evaluation scripts because it provides a unified framework for all 7 tasks, and enables direct comparison of model performance across different task types.
Evaluates code generation models on the program synthesis task by accepting natural language problem descriptions and generating code solutions in any of 17 languages. The evaluation pipeline (Phase 1: Generation, Phase 2: Execution, Phase 3: Metrics) runs generated code against unit tests via ExecEval, computing pass@k metrics (pass@1, pass@10, etc.) that measure the probability of finding a correct solution within k samples. Supports both single-solution and multi-sample evaluation modes for assessing model reliability.
Unique: Implements a three-phase evaluation pipeline (Generation → Execution → Metrics) with explicit pass@k computation that measures the probability of finding a correct solution within k attempts, rather than just binary pass/fail. Supports multi-sample evaluation across 17 languages with language-specific compiler configurations and timeout handling.
vs alternatives: More rigorous than HumanEval's simple pass@k because it handles language-specific compilation errors and timeouts explicitly, and scales to 25M training examples vs HumanEval's 164 problems.
Evaluates code translation models by accepting source code in one language and generated translations in a target language, then validating functional equivalence through execution against shared unit tests. The translation evaluation pipeline compiles and executes both source and translated code against the same unittest_db.json test cases, comparing outputs to detect translation errors. Supports all 17 language pairs (though not all pairs may have training data) and uses language-specific compiler mappings to handle syntax differences.
Unique: Validates code translation by executing both source and target code against identical unit tests and comparing outputs, ensuring functional equivalence rather than syntactic similarity. Uses language-specific compiler mappings to handle the complexity of 17 different compilation environments and their idiosyncrasies.
vs alternatives: More rigorous than BLEU-score-based translation metrics because it validates actual functional correctness through execution, and covers more language pairs (17 vs typical 2-4) with explicit compiler integration.
Evaluates program repair models by providing buggy code snippets and expecting corrected versions that pass unit tests. The APR evaluation pipeline executes repaired code against unittest_db.json test cases, measuring whether the repair successfully fixes the bug without introducing new failures. Supports repairs across all 17 languages and uses the same execution-based validation as program synthesis, enabling direct comparison of repair quality.
Unique: Treats program repair as an executable task where success is measured by unit test passage, rather than syntactic similarity to reference repairs. Integrates with the same ExecEval pipeline as program synthesis, enabling direct performance comparison between generation and repair models.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than traditional APR benchmarks (Defects4J, QuixBugs) because it covers 17 languages and 7,500 problems vs 395 Java bugs, and uses consistent execution-based metrics across all repair types.
+5 more capabilities