I like their honesty in benchmarks, looks like Qwen3.6 35B is outperforming their Laguna M.1 225B model
Laguna XS.2 33B-A3B params: 30.6
Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B : 51.5
Devstral 2 123B : 31.2
Quite a huge lead for Qwen... well, at least it's catching up to other smaller Western labs.Also, *ops work, which in my experience can actually be more complicated than SWE is underrepresented there obviously.
I usually score pretty well in colour perception tests but distinguishing between those two purples made me doubt myself.
One nit: I've seen on this homepage, and many others, this notion that the people behind the models are "working towards AGI".
I get that this is marketing speak, but transformers are not AGI, and they will never be AGI, so it'd be great if people stopped saying that as it sort of wears out the meaning of "working towards AGI".
Transformers have approximate knowledge of many things. Is this not 'general'? Where is the goalpost here?
Of course not. That's like saying the Encyclopedia Britannica is AGI.
> What does AGI mean to you?
I would define AGI as human-like machine intelligence (or superior).
This is difficult for some people to understand because they don't understand what "human-like" means in the first place. Neuroscientists would be able to set some of these wayward computer scientists straight on this question.
Like the claim "transformers are AGI", this needs proof, otherwise should be prefixed "I think". And honestly, positive proof is easier than negative proof (you just need to make one transformer model that is a AGI, whereas the never claim requires you to enumerated all possibilities).
The negative proof is there in the definition itself. Transformers are not AGI, they're frozen human intelligence of the autocomplete variety. That can never be AGI and anyone who says otherwise doesn't understand transformers or AGI.
rohitpaulk•1h ago