
What happened
On 15 long contract and NDA questions, Jev, Lev, Jeff-0.8B and Qwen3.5-4B each scored 100.0%, while Kev-4B hit 60.0% and CLM-8B 20.0%; Jeff-0.8B averaged 0.56 seconds per question.
Why it matters
A locally hosted model in Jeff-0.8B's size class matched the higher-scoring cloud and 8B options on this document-reading task, suggesting small local models can handle clause-level screening work usually routed to larger systems.
What to watch
The 100.0% rests on 15 questions and on the fact that the answers are written explicitly in the documents, so the test is whether the same accuracy holds once answers must be inferred rather than retrieved.
WHO IT HITSLegal, procurement and compliance teams that pre-screen NDAs, SOWs and vendor contracts before human review are the clearest audience, since a small local model can run that first-pass triage on a single desktop GPU.
Summaries like this, in your inbox every morning.
The test set out to answer a practical question: how much of a cloud decision model's behavior a local setup can reproduce. The author had already run earlier experiments with Kev-4B and Qwen3.5-4B, but those used per-model Python scripts, so prompt format, parallelism and HTTP overhead varied between runs. This round put all six models behind the same REST protocol, the TypeSafe ADR-010 /v1/systemone wire format, and measured them through levbench, an open evaluation harness published by Interfaze AI. That change alone shifted results: Jev's measured accuracy moved from 76.67% to 77.33% and its wall time halved to 6.4 seconds, while Qwen3.5-4B dropped from 67.00% to 60.00% because the harness sends one request at a time instead of using SGLang's dynamic batching.
The long-document phase tested something different from the 300-question S1Bench suite. The 15 questions asked whether models could locate specific clauses inside 2,000 to 4,500+ token agreements, such as a 14-day written-confirmation rule for oral disclosures or a three-year survival period. The results split cleanly by architecture. Cross-Attention designs (Jev, Lev, Jeff-0.8B) and Qwen3.5-4B's RadixAttention prefix cache all reached 100.0%. Kev-4B's Gated DeltaNet, which runs in linear time but compresses history into a fixed-size state, managed only 60.0%, and CLM-8B's pooled document embedding collapsed to 40.0% even with Action Caching, with 13 of 15 answers biased to False.
The contrast between these results and the HelpSteer2 scoring task is the study's most useful signal. Jeff-0.8B scored 100.0% on contract retrieval but just 18.0% on 5-point response-quality judgments, where the model must check answers against its own stored knowledge rather than text in front of it. The author reads this as a deployment rule rather than a flaw: when judging facts a model has not memorized, or rules it has never seen, feed the premises directly in the prompt and let the model only compare. Whether that rule holds outside these 15 documents is the open question, and it is likely to decide how much of this local setup reaches production.
Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.
Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →
Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.
Chunghwa Telecom president Rong-shy Lin said the shift from conversational AI to autonomous AI agents is resha…

Apple and Meta said they would jointly release a new open-weight AI model designed to run on high-end Macs, ai…

A writer and entrepreneur opened his daily to-do list and found 156 items, and concluded that an AI assistant…

A Zenn contributor sorted AI use into three modes — AI as an assistant, AI running alongside people, and AI th…

A non-engineer operator says one person ships four smartphone apps on Google Play, three on the App Store, wit…

The walkthrough points the CLI at a local mock via the ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL environment variable
