Simon Willison

Qwen 3.8 27B is excellent, but it defaults to wildly overthinking things

Friday's big release was Qwen 3. 8 27B , an Apache 2 licensed 27B parameter vision-capable LLM from Alibaba's Qwen research lab.

Simon Willison
Aug 26

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is an open‑weights multimodal Mixture‑of‑Experts (MoE) model previewing the architecture of Qwen4. It contains 125 B tokens with only 6 B active, giving a performance boost. The author has tested it on a DGX Spark with Unsloth quantized models, exploring variants like UD‑IQ1_S and UD‑Q2_K_XL, and highlighted a high‑reasoning‑effort example from UD‑Q2_K_XL.

arXiv AI
Sep 17

The Inference Engineering Pareto Atlas: Which Optimizations Dominate the Cost, Quality, and Latency Frontier?

The paper presents a Pareto atlas of LLM inference optimizations, mapping cost, quality, and latency trade‑offs for Qwen2.5‑7B‑Instruct on L4, A100, and H100 GPUs. Using 54 measured configurations and a calibrated simulator, it identifies 18 of 36 setups on the Pareto frontier, showing that combined methods outperform single ones. Quality tests reveal that AWQ 4bit and FP8 weights offer significant latency reductions while largely preserving accuracy, but naive FP8 KV caching fails to answer any questions correctly.

By Srikanta Datta Tumkur, Jay Iyer, Mehar Simhadri, Sai Pavan Kumar, Sai Kapil Kumar, Ramesh Nampelly
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 29

How Far Do On-Prem Open LLMs Get on Text-to-SQL? A Cross-Family Size x Technique Frontier on BIRD

Organizations that cannot send data to a cloud API increasingly ask: how good is Text-to-SQL if the model must run on-premises on open weights, and which popular accuracy "recipes" are worth their compute? We answer with an honest, fully reproducible benchmark on the BIRD development split (n=1534, Execution Accuracy), evaluating three open model families across two generations -- Qwen2.

arXiv AI
Sep 25

An Empirical Study of VLM Pipelines for Long-Document QA

The paper evaluates how different design choices—document feeding strategy, retrieval method, and execution mode—affect Vision‑Language Models (VLMs) on long‑document question answering. Experiments on two benchmarks show that a multi‑tool agent only outperforms static input when the VLM is large, that retrieval modality (image vs text) is more critical than the specific retriever, and that combining the best pipelines per question can significantly boost performance. The study highlights the trade‑offs between token efficiency, model size, and pipeline complexity for deploying VLMs on complex documents.

By Kenan E. Ak, Jay Mohta, Gwang Gook Lee, Yan Xu, Dimitrios Dimitriadis