LiquidAI/LFM2.5-24B-A2B-GGUF
Text Generation • 24B • Updated • 17.8k • 99
calculatortamer
calculatortamer
AI & ML interests
None yet
Recent Activity
liked a model about 16 hours ago
LiquidAI/LFM2.5-24B-A2B-GGUF new activity 2 days ago
prism-ml/Ternary-Bonsai-2-27B-gguf:llama.cpp upstream commit has landed - or has it? liked a model 3 days ago
ISTA-DASLab/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-GSQ-RCO-GGUFOrganizations
None yet
liked a
model about 16 hours ago
llama.cpp upstream commit has landed - or has it?
4
#93 opened 2 days ago
by 
ivoras
liked 2
models 3 days ago
reacted to bartowski's post with 👍 3 days ago
Post
80,688
You may have noticed that my upload of MiMo-V2.5 upload didn't have the author in the model name:
bartowski/MiMo-V2.5-GGUF
Going forward, I plan to upload models from major 1st party developers without the author name attached for cleanliness, I feel it results in a nicer and more expected user experience
I will continue to uploaded fine tunes with that author + "_" appended for clarity, I personally feel it's nice to know at a glance who's tune it is, but it's also for the reason I first started doing it, to avoid it being confused for a new version of the official release
I hope this change makes sense, it seemed most reasonable to me and a poll I did (forever ago, I move slow sometimes) made it seem likely others would find it reasonable as well (feel free to let me know if you disagree, may not change my mind but I do value knowing what others think)
Thanks for downloading :)
bartowski/MiMo-V2.5-GGUF
Going forward, I plan to upload models from major 1st party developers without the author name attached for cleanliness, I feel it results in a nicer and more expected user experience
I will continue to uploaded fine tunes with that author + "_" appended for clarity, I personally feel it's nice to know at a glance who's tune it is, but it's also for the reason I first started doing it, to avoid it being confused for a new version of the official release
I hope this change makes sense, it seemed most reasonable to me and a poll I did (forever ago, I move slow sometimes) made it seem likely others would find it reasonable as well (feel free to let me know if you disagree, may not change my mind but I do value knowing what others think)
Thanks for downloading :)
- 5 replies
reacted to AtAndDev's post with 😔 4 days ago
Post
5,139
@Banaxi-Tech stop hiding my comments. AND STOP STEALING PAPERS AND SPREADING MISINFORMATION.
your BGA blog is a copy of NSA (deepseek, 2025) branded under your name. literally the same top16 selected blocks, 512 local window, router over block summaries, all you did was change block size from 64 to 128.
you didnt cite NSA once but you put a “please cite BGA” bibtex at the bottom.
i commented under your post and said that there is no way that you can support claims like: “The Accuracy Should BE WAy better than DSA but untested yet.” you didnt run a single experiment. and the 256x isnt from BGA, its just n/2k with k=2048 so the exact same k DSA uses. if opus wrote this for you, at least read it before posting.
i commented again after you hid my comment despite it having constructive and correct feedback and you hid that too. and again.
you can hide the truth and just try to get hf post likes..... but is it really the thing that needs to be done? do you really want to take papers and make them yours while barely even changing the params?
admitting your mistakes and doing something about them needs humbleness, intelligence, humanness.
i encourage you to admit your mistakes and try to do better next time (at least read what blog your ai wrote or do proper experiments to back your stuff up).
your BGA blog is a copy of NSA (deepseek, 2025) branded under your name. literally the same top16 selected blocks, 512 local window, router over block summaries, all you did was change block size from 64 to 128.
you didnt cite NSA once but you put a “please cite BGA” bibtex at the bottom.
i commented under your post and said that there is no way that you can support claims like: “The Accuracy Should BE WAy better than DSA but untested yet.” you didnt run a single experiment. and the 256x isnt from BGA, its just n/2k with k=2048 so the exact same k DSA uses. if opus wrote this for you, at least read it before posting.
i commented again after you hid my comment despite it having constructive and correct feedback and you hid that too. and again.
you can hide the truth and just try to get hf post likes..... but is it really the thing that needs to be done? do you really want to take papers and make them yours while barely even changing the params?
admitting your mistakes and doing something about them needs humbleness, intelligence, humanness.
i encourage you to admit your mistakes and try to do better next time (at least read what blog your ai wrote or do proper experiments to back your stuff up).
- 49 replies
published a
model 5 days ago
updated a
model 5 days ago
upvoted a changelog 9 days ago
Hugging Face Changelog
P(doom) on user profiles
• 353
upvoted an article about 1 month ago
Article
Per-tensor layout maps for GGUF quantization
bartowski
• • 42 Gemma-4 QAT Special Unsloth quants
❤️ 4
10
#1 opened 4 months ago
by 
danielhanchen
liked a
model 6 months ago
why doesn't IQ4_XS use IQ4_XS?
1
#23 opened 6 months ago
by calculatortamer
liked a
model 6 months ago
updated a
model 7 months ago
published a
model 7 months ago
updated 2
models 7 months ago
published a
model 7 months ago
