| @soletta Great question — this is exactly why we built it this way. *Short answer*: frontier LLMs are excellent at static self-critique, but terrible for *real-time token-by-token streaming guardrails* because of latency, cost, and lack of persistent custom memory. *Why DeBERTa + RAG wins here*:
- *Latency*: DeBERTa-v3-base + Rust kernel scores every ~4 tokens in ~220 ms (AggreFact eval). A frontier LLM call (GPT-4o/Claude 3.5) is 400–2000 ms per check. You can’t do that mid-stream without killing UX.
- *Cost*: Frontier self-checking at scale = real money. This runs fully local/offline after the one-time model download.
- *Custom knowledge*: The 0.4× RAG weight pulls from your GroundTruthStore (ChromaDB). Frontier models don’t have a live, updatable external fact base unless you keep stuffing context (expensive + context-window limited).
- *Determinism & auditability*: Small fine-tunable NLI model + fixed vector DB = reproducible decisions. LLMs-as-judges are stochastic and hard to debug in prod. We’re completely transparent: the NLI scorer alone is *not SOTA* (66.2% balanced acc on LLM-AggreFact 29k samples — see full table vs MiniCheck/Bespoke/HHEM in the repo). The value is the live system: NLI + user KB + actual streaming halt that no one else ships today. Full end-to-end comparisons vs. LLM-as-judge in streaming setups are next on the roadmap (happy to run them on any dataset you care about). Have you tried frontier self-critique in real streaming agents? What broke for you? Repo benchmarks: https://github.com/anulum/director-ai#benchmarks |
I saw your benchmarks, what I was asking for is benchmarks of the full system (LLM + the NLI model) vs a frontier LLM on its own. Its fine if you didn't do them, but I think it hurts your case.