I spent months trying to break the quadratic O(N^2) bottleneck of Transformers. Today I'm releasing Pulse-Field v3.0 — an event-driven, neuro-symbolic architecture that runs in O(N) time.
Benchmarks vs GPT-2 style baseline (on CPU):
- Latency: 5ms (vs 60ms)
- Context: Tested up to 100k tokens with <3ms penalty.
- Size: Starts at ~20MB (dynamic growth).
The architecture uses "Event-Driven Routing" instead of dense attention matrices. Tokens travel as impulses through a graph of specialized "crystals" (logic/memory nodes), activating only relevant paths.
This entire core was architected and coded in a 55-minute sprint using a swarm of AI agents (reasoning models) that I orchestrated to overcome the "average output" bias of standard LLMs.
Happy to answer questions about the routing logic!
kevmo314•3m ago
You might want to read the code your AI agents are producing. Even the agents are aware that the metrics are all made up.
makimilan•12m ago
I spent months trying to break the quadratic O(N^2) bottleneck of Transformers. Today I'm releasing Pulse-Field v3.0 — an event-driven, neuro-symbolic architecture that runs in O(N) time.
Benchmarks vs GPT-2 style baseline (on CPU): - Latency: 5ms (vs 60ms) - Context: Tested up to 100k tokens with <3ms penalty. - Size: Starts at ~20MB (dynamic growth).
The architecture uses "Event-Driven Routing" instead of dense attention matrices. Tokens travel as impulses through a graph of specialized "crystals" (logic/memory nodes), activating only relevant paths.
This entire core was architected and coded in a 55-minute sprint using a swarm of AI agents (reasoning models) that I orchestrated to overcome the "average output" bias of standard LLMs.
Happy to answer questions about the routing logic!