--- license: other license_name: glm-5 license_link: https://huggingface.co/zai-org/GLM-5.1/blob/main/LICENSE base_model: zai-org/GLM-5.1 tags: - reap - pruning - moe - expert-pruning - glm - unverified - experimental - do-not-use-in-production library_name: transformers pipeline_tag: text-generation --- # ***CRITICAL WARNING: UNTESTED EXPERIMENTAL CHECKPOINT*** ## **DO NOT USE THIS MODEL FOR ANYTHING SERIOUS.** This checkpoint has **not been benchmarked, validated, or tested for coherence**. It may produce **garbage, repetitive loops, incoherent text, or complete nonsense**. Treat it as a **broken artifact until proven otherwise**. --- ## GLM-5.1 — 25% Expert Pruned (REAP) This is a **25% expert-pruned** version of [`zai-org/GLM-5.1`](https://huggingface.co/zai-org/GLM-5.1) using the [REAP method](https://github.com/CerebrasResearch/reap) (Relative Expert Activation Pruning). | Property | Value | |----------|-------| | Base model | `zai-org/GLM-5.1` | | Architecture | `GlmMoeDsaForCausalLM` (MoE with Dynamic Sparse Attention) | | Params before prune | 743.91B | | Params after prune | ~555B | | Parameter reduction | 25.4% | | Routed experts per layer | 256 → 192 (removed 64) | | Shared experts per layer | 1 (unchanged) | | Active params/token | ~14B (top-8 routing preserved) | | Precision | BF16 | | Prune method | REAP (layerwise, refusal_contrast_reap, renorm) | | Sparse MoE layers | 75 of 78 total (first 3 are dense) | | Estimated max per-layer REAP signal loss | ~15.8% | | Observation coverage | 6144/6999 packed batches, 7707/22000 samples (~35% of planned calibration) | ## Why This Might Be Broken 1. **Partial calibration data** — The saliency scores used to select experts for removal were computed from only ~35% of the planned 22,000-sample calibration corpus. Expert importance rankings may be inaccurate. 2. **No quality testing whatsoever** — Zero benchmarks have been run. No coherence check. No perplexity measurement. No human evaluation. The model could produce degenerate output for all we know. 3. **Aggressive prune ratio** — Prior experiments with GLM-family models at similar or higher prune ratios resulted in complete output collapse (repetitive text, broken reasoning, junk logits). The 50% checkpoint in particular is very likely broken based on prior GLM-5 evidence. 4. **DSA architecture sensitivity** — GLM-5.1 uses Dynamic Sparse Attention with learned indexer weights. The interaction between pruned expert routing and the DSA indexer has not been validated. 5. **refusal_contrast_reap without preserve guards** — The pruning was done using `refusal_contrast_reap` selection without `preserve_super` or `preserve_outlier` guardrails, which in prior GLM-5 experiments led to output collapse at high prune ratios. ## What This Is Useful For - **Research only.** Specifically: - Studying REAP expert saliency patterns in GLM-5.1 - Comparing prune-ratio robustness across architectures - Running your own coherence/benchmark evaluations - Investigating MoE collapse behavior ## How to Load ```python from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer import torch model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained( "0xSero/GLM-5.1-555B-A14B-REAP", device_map="auto", torch_dtype=torch.bfloat16, trust_remote_code=True, ) tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("0xSero/GLM-5.1-555B-A14B-REAP", trust_remote_code=True) # IMPORTANT: GLM-5.1 is a thinking/chat model. Use the chat template. messages = [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}] inputs = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(messages, return_tensors="pt", add_generation_prompt=True) out = model.generate(inputs.to(model.device), max_new_tokens=128) print(tokenizer.decode(out[0])) ``` ## Pruning Method [REAP](https://github.com/CerebrasResearch/reap) (Relative Expert Activation Pruning) removes MoE experts by measuring their relative activation patterns during a calibration pass. Experts with the lowest saliency scores (combined REAP signal + frequency weighting) are removed layer-by-layer, keeping `top-8` routing unchanged so the active-parameter budget per token stays the same. ## Sibling Checkpoints | Prune % | Total Params | Experts/layer | HuggingFace | |---------|-------------|--------------|-------------| | 25% | ~555B | 192/256 | [`0xSero/GLM-5.1-555B-A14B-REAP`](https://huggingface.co/0xSero/GLM-5.1-555B-A14B-REAP) | | 40% | 455B | 154/256 | [`0xSero/GLM-5.1-444B-A14B-REAP`](https://huggingface.co/0xSero/GLM-5.1-444B-A14B-REAP) | | 50% | ~367B | 128/256 | [`0xSero/GLM-5.1-367B-A14B-REAP`](https://huggingface.co/0xSero/GLM-5.1-367B-A14B-REAP) | **All three are untested. The 25% checkpoint is the most likely to be coherent.** ## Citation If you use this checkpoint, cite the [REAP paper](https://github.com/CerebrasResearch/reap) and clearly note that this is an unverified experimental artifact. --- **Last updated:** 2026-04-14 **Status:** UNVERIFIED / UNTESTED / EXPERIMENTAL / LIKELY DEGENERATE