Select 'Motif 2.6B' from the dropdown next to the Send button.
Introduction
We announce
Motif 2.6B
, a 2.6 billion parameter language model trained from scratch on AMD Instinct™ MI250 GPUs. Motif 2.6B marks our very first step toward building helpful, reliable AI aligned with human values. With this initial release, our goal is for Motif 2.6B to match the performance of well-known open-source models such as Gemma, Llama, and Phi — particularly those in the sLLM regime.
Training information
GPUs: 384 MI250
Training time: 42 days
Training data: 2.4T tokens
Notice: A detailed technical report will be released at a later time.
Evaluation
When models are released, their accompanying technical reports or papers often present benchmark results based on evaluation settings chosen by the developers. While this is a common and understandable practice, it can lead to challenges when comparing models across different organizations. The same model may yield different scores depending on evaluation conditions, and details of these conditions are not always fully disclosed. This lack of standardization can make it difficult for the open-source community to interpret and trust reported results. We therefore reference performance scores based on the official numbers reported by each model’s developers in their respective publications.
To illustrate how much evaluation scores can vary across reports, we provide concrete examples of benchmark score differences for major models in the
Evaluation Appendix
.
Comparison to Mistral 7B by Mistral AI
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Mistral 7B technical report
.
Benchmark
Metric
Mistral 7B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement
MMLU
5-shot
60.1
57.93
-3.61%
HellaSwag
0-shot
81.3
61.35
-24.54%
WinoG
0-shot
75.3
59.91
-20.44%
PIQA
0-shot
83
75.95
-8.49%
Arc-e
0-shot
80
87.21
+9.01%
Arc-c
0-shot
55.5
74.2
+33.69%
NQ
5-shot
28.8
11.14
-61.32%
TriviaQA
5-shot
69.9
54.97
-21.36%
HumanEval
0-shot
30.5
68.3
+123.93%
MBPP
3-shot
47.5
60.3
+26.95%
MATH
4-shot, maj@4
13.1
40.2*
+206.87%
GSM8K
8-shot, maj@8
52.2
80.21
+53.66%
Average
+34.25%
* : We report the 4-shot, maj@1 score instead of the 4-shot, maj@4.
Comparison to the Gemma series by Google
Gemma 1 & 2
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Gemma 2 technical report
.
Note: Although referred to as "2B", Gemma 2 2B actually has
2.6 billion
parameters.
Benchmark
Metric
Gemma 1 2B
Gemma 1 7B
Gemma 2 2B
Gemma 2 9B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement(over 1 1B)
Improvement(over 1 7B)
Improvement(over 2 2B)
Improvement(over 2 9B)
MMLU
5-shot
42.3
64.4
52.2
71.3
57.93
+36.95%
-10.05%
+10.98%
-18.75%
ARC-C
25-shot
48.5
61.1
55.7
68.4
75.08
+54.80%
+22.88%
+34.79%
+9.77%
GSM8K
5-shot
15.1
51.8
24.3
68.6
75.13
+397.55%
+45.04%
+309.18%
+9.52%
AGIEval
3-5-shot
24.2
44.9
31.5
52.8
-
-
-
-
-
DROP
3-shot, F1
48.5
56.3
51.2
69.4
29.33
-39.53%
-47.90%
-42.71%
-57.74%
BBH
3-shot, CoT
35.2
59
41.9
68.2
48.56
37.95%
-17.69%
+15.89%
-28.80%
Winogrande
5-shot
66.8
79
71.3
80.6
67.09
+0.43%
-15.08%
-5.90%
-16.76%
HellaSwag
10-shot
71.7
82.3
72.9
81.9
69.89
-2.52%
-15.08%
-4.13%
-14.66%
MATH
4-shot
11.8
24.3
16
36.6
40.2
+240.88%
+65.43%
+151.25%
+9.84%
ARC-e
0-shot
73.2
81.5
80.6
88
87.21
+19.14%
+7.01%
+8.20%
-0.90%
PIQA
0-shot
77.3
81.2
78.4
81.7
75.95
-1.75%
-6.47%
-3.13%
-7.04%
SIQA
0-shot
49.7
51.8
51.9
53.4
61.97
+24.69%
+19.63%
+19.40%
+16.05%
Boolq
0-shot
69.4
83.2
72.7
84.2
67.76
-2.36%
-18.56%
-6.80%
-19.52%
TriviaQA
5-shot
53.2
63.4
60.4
76.6
54.97
+3.33%
-13.30%
-8.99%
-28.24%
NQ
5-shot
12.5
23
17.1
29.2
10.91
-12.72%
-52.57%
-36.20%
-62.64%
HumanEval
pass@1
22
32.3
20.1
40.2
68.3
+210.45%
+111.46%
+239.80%
+69.90%
MBPP
3-shot
29.2
44.4
30.2
52.4
60.3
+106.51%
+35.81%
+99.67%
+15.08%
Average
+90.79%
+3.44%
+46.17%
-13.45%
Gemma 3
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Gemma 3 technical report
.
Benchmark
Metric
Gemma 3 1B
Gemma 3 4B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement(over 1B)
Improvement(over 4B)
HellaS
10-shot
62.3
77.2
69.89
+12.18%
-9.47%
BoolQ
0-shot
63.2
72.3
67.76
+7.22%
-6.28%
PIQA
0-shot
73.8
79.6
75.59
+2.43%
-5.04%
SIQA
0-shot
48.9
51.9
61.97
+26.73%
+19.40%
TQA
5-shot
39.8
65.8
54.97
+38.12%
-16.46%
NQ
5-shot
9.48
20
10.91
+15.08%
-45.45%
ARC-C
25-shot
38.4
56.2
75.08
+95.52%
+33.59%
ARC-E
0-shot
73
82.4
87.21
+19.47%
+5.84%
WinoG
5-shot
58.2
64.7
67.09
+15.27%
+3.69%
BBH
few-shot, CoT
28.4
50.9
48.56
+70.99%
-4.60%
Drop
1-shot, F1
42.4
60.1
29.33
-30.83%
-51.20%
MMLU
5-shot
-
59.6
57.93
-
-2.80%
MMLUpro
5-shot, CoT
-
29.2
-
-
-
AGIE
3-5-shot
-
42.1
-
-
-
MATH
4-shot, CoT
-
24.2
40.2
-
+66.12%
GSM8K
8-shot, CoT
-
38.4
80.21
-
+108.88%
GPQA Diamond
5-shot, CoT
-
15
31.81
-
+112.07%
MBPP
3-shot
-
46
60.3
-
+31.09%
HumanE
0-shot
-
36
68.3
-
+89.72%
IFEval
-
80.2
90.2
74.02
-7.71%
-17.94%
Average
+22.04%
+17.29%
Comparison to the Llama series by Meta
Llama 3
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Llama 3 technical report
.
Benchmark
Metric
Llama 3 8B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement
MMLU
5-shot
69.4
57.93
-16.53%
MMLU
0-shot, CoT
73
57.95
-20.62%
MMLU-Pro
5-shot, CoT
48.3
-
-
IFEval
-
80.4
74.02
-7.94%
HumanEval
0-shot
72.6
68.3
-5.92%
MBPP
0-shot
72.8
57.93
-20.43%
GSM8K
8-shot, CoT
84.5
80.21
-5.08%
MATH
0-shot, CoT
51.9
49.68
-4.28%
ARC Challenge
0-shot
83.4
74.2
-11.03%
GPQA
0-shot, CoT
32.8
18.53
-43.51%
Average
-15.04%
Llama 3.2
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Llama 3.2 official blog
.
Benchmark
Metric
Llama 3.2 1B
Llama 3.2 3B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement(over 1B)
Improvement(over 3B)
MMLU
0-shot
49.3
63.4
57.6
+16.75%
-9.21%
Open-rewrite eval*
0-shot, rougeL
41.6
40.1
-
-
-
TLDR9+
test, 1-shot, rougeL
16.8
19
-
-
-
IFEval
-
59.5
77.4
74.02
+24.40%
-4.37%
GSM8K
8-shot, CoT
44.4
77.7
80.21
+80.65%
+3.23%
MATH
0-shot, CoT
30.6
48
49.68
+62.35%
+3.50%
ARC Challenge
0-shot
59.4
78.6
74.2
+24.92%
-5.6%
GPQA
0-shot
27.2
32.8
25.45
-6.43%
-22.41%
Hellaswag
0-shot
41.2
69.8
61.35
+48.91%
-12.11%
Average
+41.82%
-2.49%
Comparison to the Phi series by Microsoft
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Phi-3 technical report
.
Benchmark
Metric
Phi-3 3.8B
Phi-3 7B
Phi-2 2.7B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement(over 3.8B)
Improvement(over 7B)
Improvement(over 2.7B)
MMLU
5-shot
68.8
75.7
56.3
57.93
-15.80%
-23.47%
+2.90%
HellaSwag
5-shot
76.7
77
53.6
68.97
-10.08%
-10.43%
+28.68%
ANLI
7-shot
52.8
58.1
42.5
47.99
-9.11%
-17.40%
+12.92%
GSM-8K
8-shot, CoT
82.5
89.6
61.1
80.21
-2.78%
-10.48%
+31.28%
MATH
0-shot, CoT
41.3
34.6
-
49.68
+20.29%
+43.58%
-
MedQA
2-shot
53.8
65.4
40.9
42.1
-21.75%
-35.63%
+2.93%
AGIEval
0-shot
37.5
45.1
29.8
-
-
-
-
TriviaQA
5-shot
64
58.1
45.2
54.97
-14.11%
-5.39%
+21.62%
Arc-C
10-shot
84.9
90.7
75.9
75.17
-11.46%
-17.12%
-0.96%
Arc-E
10-shot
94.6
97
88.5
88.64
-6.30%
-8.62%
+0.16%
PIQA
5-shot
84.2
86.9
60.2
78.29
-7.02%
-9.91%
+30.05%
SociQA
5-shot
76.6
79.2
68.3
66.73
-12.89%
-15.74%
-2.3%
BigBench-Hard
3-shot, CoT
71.7
79.1
59.4
48.56
-32.27%
-38.61%
-18.25%
WinoGrande
5-shot
70.8
81.5
54.7
67.09
-5.24%
-17.68%
+22.65%
OpenBookQA
10-shot
83.2
88
73.6
87.8
+5.53%
-0.23%
+19.29%
BoolQ
2-shot
77.2
84.8
-
70.7
-8.42%
-16.63%
-
CommonSenseQA
10-shot
80.2
80
69.3
71.25
-11.16%
-10.94%
2.81%
TruthfulQA
10-shot
65
70.2
-
52.07
-19.89%
-25.83%
-
HumanEval
0-shot
58.5
61
59
68.29
+16.74%
+11.95%
+15.75%
MBPP
3-shot
70
71.7
60.6
60.3
-13.86%
-15.90%
-0.50%
GPQA
2-shot, CoT
32.8
34.3
-
27.9
-14.94%
-18.66%
-
MT Bench
2R. Avg.
8.38
8.7
-
6.77
-19.21%
-22.18%
-
Average
-9.87%
-13.25%
+10.56%
Evaluation Appendix
In the comparisons presented above, Motif 2.6B showed average performance improvements of -15.36% and -13.45% over Llama 3 8B and Gemma 2 9B, respectively, based on the benchmark scores reported in their original technical reports. However, when compared to the benchmarks and scores reported in the Qwen 2.5 technical report, Motif 2.6B shows an average improvement of +19.27% over Llama 3 8B and +1.68% over Gemma 2 9B. See the table below for details.
Comparison to Llama 3 8B and Gemma 2 9B based on scores from the
Qwen2.5 technical report
The benchmarks and corresponding scores listed in the table below are taken directly from the
Qwen2.5 technical report
.
Benchmark
Metric
Llama 3 8B
Gemma 2 9B
Motif 2.6B
Improvement(over Llama 3 8B)
Improvement(over Gemma 2 9B)
MMLU
5-shot
66.6
71.3
57.93
-13.02%
-18.75%
MMLU-pro
5-shot
35.4
44.7
28.4
-19.77%
-36.47%
MMLU-redux
5-shot
61.6
67.9
59.54
-3.34%
-12.31%
BBH
3-shot
57.7
68.2
39.28
-31.92%
-42.40%
ARC-C
25-shot
59.3
68.2
75.08
+26.61%
+10.09%
TruthfulQA
0-shot
44
45.3
41.55
-5.56%
-8.27%
Winogrande
5-shot
77.4
79.5
67.09
-13.32%
-15.61%
HellaSwag
10-shot
82.1
81.9
69.88
-14.88%
-14.68%
GPQA
5-shot
25.8
32.8
29.24
+13.33%
-10.85%
TheoremQA
5-shot
22.1
28.9
-
-
-
MATH
4-shot
20.5
37.7
40.2
+96.10%
+6.63%
MMLU-stem
5-shot
55.3
65.1
52.9
-4.34%
-18.74%
GSM8K
4-shot
55.3
70.7
75.2
+35.99%
+6.36%
HumanEval
0-shot
33.5
37.8
68.3
+103.88%
+80.69%
HumanEval+
0-shot
29.3
30.5
62.2
+112.29%
+103.93%
MBPP
0-shot
53.9
62.2
60.3
+11.87%
-3.05%
MBPP+
0-shot
44.4
50.6
50.8
+14.41%
+0.40%
MultiPL-E
0-shot
22.6
34.9
-
-
-
Average
+19.27%
+1.68%
How to use
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(
"Motif-Technologies/Motif-2.6B",
trust_remote_code = True,
_attn_implementation = "eager", # also supports flash_attention_2
).cuda()
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(
"Motif-Technologies/Motif-2.6B",
trust_remote_code = True,
)
query = "What is the capital city of South Korea?"
input_ids = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(
[
{'role': 'system', 'content': 'you are an helpful assistant'},
{'role': 'user', 'content': query},
],
add_generation_prompt = True,
return_tensors='pt',
).cuda()
output = model.generate(input_ids, max_new_tokens=128, pad_token_id=tokenizer.eos_token_id)
output = tokenizer.decode(output[0, input_ids.shape[-1]:], skip_special_tokens = True)
print(output)
"""The capital city of South Korea is Seoul. Located in the southern part of the country, Seoul is not only the largest city in South Korea but also one of the largest metropolitan areas in the world.It is a vibrant and dynamic city known for its rich history, cultural heritage, and modern amenities. Seoul is a major economic, cultural, and political center in East Asia, and it plays a crucial role in the region's politics, economy, and culture.The city is divided into different administrative districts, each with its own unique characteristics and attractions."""
Runs of Motif-Technologies Motif-2.6B on huggingface.co
137
Total runs
0
24-hour runs
-34
3-day runs
-27
7-day runs
-7
30-day runs
More Information About Motif-2.6B huggingface.co Model
Motif-2.6B huggingface.co is an AI model on huggingface.co that provides Motif-2.6B's model effect (), which can be used instantly with this Motif-Technologies Motif-2.6B model. huggingface.co supports a free trial of the Motif-2.6B model, and also provides paid use of the Motif-2.6B. Support call Motif-2.6B model through api, including Node.js, Python, http.
Motif-2.6B huggingface.co is an online trial and call api platform, which integrates Motif-2.6B's modeling effects, including api services, and provides a free online trial of Motif-2.6B, you can try Motif-2.6B online for free by clicking the link below.
Motif-Technologies Motif-2.6B online free url in huggingface.co:
Motif-2.6B is an open source model from GitHub that offers a free installation service, and any user can find Motif-2.6B on GitHub to install. At the same time, huggingface.co provides the effect of Motif-2.6B install, users can directly use Motif-2.6B installed effect in huggingface.co for debugging and trial. It also supports api for free installation.