| 0 |
| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $1.70e-7 per prompt token | $1.05e-6 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 6 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Generates creative prose and storytelling content optimized for narrative coherence and lexical richness. The model uses a 12B parameter architecture fine-tuned on high-quality narrative datasets to produce text with expanded vocabulary selection, varied sentence structures, and enhanced descriptive language. Operates via API inference through OpenRouter's unified endpoint, supporting streaming and batch completion modes.
Unique: Fine-tuned specifically for narrative coherence and expressive vocabulary selection rather than general-purpose instruction-following — uses training data curated from high-quality fiction and literary sources to develop nuanced word choice and descriptive patterns that distinguish it from instruction-optimized models like Llama or Mistral base variants
vs alternatives: Produces more vivid, lexically diverse prose than general-purpose 12B models (Mistral 7B, Llama 2 13B) due to narrative-specific fine-tuning, while maintaining faster inference speed than 70B+ story-focused models like Llama 2 70B or Claude
Delivers model outputs via server-sent events (SSE) streaming protocol, enabling real-time token-by-token delivery rather than waiting for full response generation. Integrates with OpenRouter's unified API layer which handles model routing, load balancing, and streaming infrastructure. Supports both streaming and non-streaming completion modes with configurable token limits and sampling parameters.
Unique: Leverages OpenRouter's unified streaming infrastructure which abstracts provider-specific streaming implementations (OpenAI SSE format, Anthropic streaming, Ollama streaming) into a single consistent API — enables switching between model providers without changing client streaming code
vs alternatives: Simpler streaming integration than direct provider APIs because OpenRouter normalizes streaming format across multiple backends, reducing client-side conditional logic vs. managing OpenAI, Anthropic, and Ollama streaming separately
Maintains conversation context through OpenRouter's message-based API format (role/content pairs), enabling multi-turn dialogue where each request includes full conversation history. The model uses this history to maintain narrative consistency, character voice, and thematic coherence across exchanges. Supports system prompts for role-playing and context injection, with configurable token budgets for context window management.
Unique: Rocinante's narrative fine-tuning enables it to maintain character voice and thematic consistency across multi-turn exchanges better than general-purpose models — the expanded vocabulary and prose patterns learned during training help preserve narrative tone even in long conversations where context becomes compressed
vs alternatives: Better narrative consistency in long conversations than smaller instruction-tuned models (Mistral 7B, Llama 2 7B) due to narrative-specific training, though requires same explicit history management as all stateless API models
Exposes fine-grained control over text generation behavior through temperature, top-p (nucleus sampling), top-k, and frequency/presence penalties. These parameters tune the probability distribution over next-token predictions, allowing users to trade off between deterministic output (low temperature) and creative variation (high temperature). Rocinante's narrative training makes it particularly responsive to temperature tuning for controlling prose style intensity.
Unique: Rocinante's narrative fine-tuning makes it particularly sensitive to temperature adjustments for prose style — lower temperatures preserve the learned narrative patterns and vocabulary choices from training, while higher temperatures encourage novel combinations that maintain narrative coherence better than general-purpose models at equivalent temperature settings
vs alternatives: More predictable parameter behavior than instruction-tuned models because narrative-specific training creates more stable probability distributions over vocabulary choices, making temperature tuning more intuitive for controlling prose style
Provides access to Rocinante 12B through OpenRouter's unified API layer, which abstracts away direct model hosting, authentication, and infrastructure management. Requests route through OpenRouter's load balancer to available inference endpoints, with automatic failover and rate limiting. Supports standard HTTP REST API with JSON request/response format, compatible with any HTTP client library.
Unique: OpenRouter's unified API abstracts Rocinante behind a consistent interface that matches OpenAI's API format, enabling drop-in model switching without application code changes — developers can test Rocinante, then swap to Llama, Mistral, or other providers by changing a single model parameter
vs alternatives: Simpler integration than direct model APIs because OpenRouter normalizes authentication, request format, and response structure across multiple providers, reducing client-side conditional logic vs. managing separate integrations for OpenAI, Anthropic, and open-source models
Generates coherent continuations of partial narratives by understanding plot context, character voice, and thematic elements from provided text. The model leverages its narrative fine-tuning to maintain consistency with established story elements, predict plausible next events, and extend prose with matching tone and vocabulary. Works by encoding the partial narrative as context and sampling likely continuations from the learned narrative distribution.
Unique: Rocinante's narrative fine-tuning enables it to maintain character voice, thematic consistency, and prose style across continuations better than general-purpose models — the training on high-quality fiction teaches implicit patterns about narrative coherence, pacing, and stylistic consistency that inform continuation generation
vs alternatives: Produces more stylistically consistent continuations than general-purpose models (Mistral, Llama) because narrative-specific training creates stronger implicit models of prose patterns and character voice, reducing jarring tone shifts between original text and continuation
GLM-5.1 executes multi-step coding tasks over extended timeframes without requiring human intervention between steps, using an internal planning mechanism that decomposes complex objectives into sub-tasks and maintains execution state across sequential operations. Unlike minute-level interaction models that require prompting after each step, this capability enables the model to autonomously navigate decision trees, handle errors, and adapt strategy based on intermediate results without context resets.
Unique: Designed specifically for minute+ autonomous execution windows rather than single-turn interactions; maintains internal execution state and decision-making across extended task horizons without requiring external orchestration or re-prompting between steps
vs alternatives: Outperforms GPT-4 and Claude for long-horizon coding tasks because it's architected for continuous autonomous operation rather than stateless request-response cycles
GLM-5.1 generates and refactors code with awareness of the full codebase structure, dependencies, and patterns, using semantic understanding of how changes in one file propagate to others. The model analyzes import graphs, function signatures, and usage patterns across files to ensure generated code maintains consistency and doesn't introduce breaking changes, rather than treating each file in isolation.
Unique: Maintains semantic awareness of codebase structure and cross-file dependencies during generation, enabling it to make coordinated changes across multiple files rather than treating each file independently
vs alternatives: Produces more consistent multi-file refactorings than Copilot or Claude because it reasons about the entire codebase context simultaneously rather than file-by-file
Z.ai: GLM 5.1 scores higher at 24/100 vs TheDrummer: Rocinante 12B at 22/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
GLM-5.1 diagnoses errors and bugs by analyzing error messages, stack traces, and code context to identify root causes and suggest fixes. The model correlates error symptoms with likely causes, explains why errors occur, and provides specific debugging steps or code fixes.
Unique: Diagnoses errors by correlating symptoms with root causes using semantic understanding of code and error patterns, providing explanations and fixes rather than just pattern matching
vs alternatives: More effective at diagnosing subtle bugs than search-based solutions because it reasons about code semantics and error causality
GLM-5.1 identifies performance bottlenecks in code and suggests optimizations with specific implementation guidance, analyzing algorithms, data structures, and resource usage to recommend improvements. The model understands performance implications of different approaches and can suggest algorithmic or architectural changes to improve efficiency.
Unique: Suggests optimizations based on algorithmic and architectural analysis rather than just code-level tweaks, understanding performance implications of different approaches
vs alternatives: Provides more meaningful performance guidance than generic LLMs because it understands algorithm complexity and can suggest structural improvements
GLM-5.1 analyzes code for security vulnerabilities including injection attacks, authentication/authorization issues, cryptographic weaknesses, and data exposure risks, providing specific remediation guidance. The model understands common vulnerability patterns and security best practices to identify risks and suggest secure implementations.
Unique: Identifies security vulnerabilities through semantic analysis of code patterns and provides remediation guidance based on security best practices, not just pattern matching against known CVEs
vs alternatives: More effective at finding context-specific security issues than SAST tools because it understands code intent and can suggest secure implementations
GLM-5.1 performs step-by-step reasoning about code behavior by internally simulating or tracing execution paths, allowing it to predict runtime behavior, identify bugs, and explain code logic without requiring actual execution. This capability uses chain-of-thought-like reasoning applied specifically to code semantics, tracking variable state, control flow, and function call sequences to reason about correctness.
Unique: Applies extended reasoning specifically to code semantics and execution paths, enabling it to predict runtime behavior and identify subtle bugs through symbolic execution simulation rather than pattern matching
vs alternatives: More effective at finding subtle logic bugs than GPT-4 because it explicitly traces execution state rather than relying on pattern recognition
GLM-5.1 maintains rich context across multiple conversation turns when working on code, remembering previous edits, design decisions, and constraints without requiring users to re-specify them. The model builds an internal model of the codebase state and user intent that persists across turns, enabling iterative refinement where each turn builds on previous work rather than starting fresh.
Unique: Maintains stateful context across turns specifically optimized for code collaboration, remembering design decisions and codebase state without explicit memory structures
vs alternatives: Provides better iterative code refinement than stateless models because it retains context about previous edits and design intent across turns
GLM-5.1 translates natural language specifications into code that preserves semantic intent, handling ambiguous or underspecified requirements by inferring reasonable implementations based on context and common patterns. The model uses semantic understanding of both natural language and code to bridge the gap between high-level intent and low-level implementation details.
Unique: Translates natural language to code with explicit semantic fidelity checking, inferring reasonable implementations for underspecified requirements rather than producing literal or incomplete code
vs alternatives: Handles ambiguous requirements better than Copilot because it uses semantic reasoning to infer intent rather than pattern matching against training data
+5 more capabilities