Decision Model
also called System One model, Scoring model
A model that picks from a fixed set of answers instead of writing text.
A model that takes a situation, a question and a fixed list of options, and returns a probability for each option in a single forward pass — no token-by-token generation. It always answers with one of the options it was given, which makes it fast and its confidence directly usable as a threshold for automation.
The trade is scope for speed. A decision model cannot explain, hedge or invent a new option; it can only rank the ones it was handed. That is the point: where the options are known in advance — route this ticket, flag this transaction, approve this step — scoring beats generating, and the model answers in tens of milliseconds instead of seconds.
Calibration is the feature, not a footnote. A decision model is only safe to automate on if its confidence means what it says: when it claims 90% confidence, it should be wrong roughly 10% of the time or less. Sarvam reports Prism makes fewer errors than its confidence predicts at every threshold from 50% to 95%, while the other models it compared make up to 4.8 times as many errors as their confidence scores predict.
The design detail that makes the speed possible is the attention mask: the state and question are read bidirectionally, each option sees only itself and the shared block, and only the final answer token sees everything. Sarvam reports that isolating the options adds about 3 points on the Jev Decision Index and makes attention 2.6 times faster on long requests, and that converting to FP8, grouping all 128 experts into one kernel and capturing the forward pass as a CUDA graph cut the median request from 664 ms to 44 ms with no accuracy drop.
The category itself is new: Sarvam credits TypeSafe AI with creating it the previous month, naming its Jev model after Kahneman’s System One thinking. The benchmark story is Sarvam’s own — it ran all 25 models itself, on the same hardware, using each model’s own inference code — so the 71.8 average and the 44 ms median are vendor-reported figures, not an independent leaderboard.
Judging an agent run without a second agent
An agent finishes a multi-step task and you need to know whether it succeeded and whether a human should review it.
Feed the recorded trace to a decision model with fixed outcomes — succeeded, needs review, failed at step N — and it scores the whole run in about half a second on one GPU. Sarvam reports 78.5% accuracy judging 700 recorded agent runs, against 70.7% for Claude Haiku 5.5 called through its API, which also took 2.5 seconds per run and cost $0.64 per 1,000 runs.
Using one where the answer is not in the option list. A decision model will still pick something; if none of the options is right, a confident wrong answer is worse than a hedged paragraph.
- blogSarvam Prism: a decision model built on Sarvam 105B ↗
The launch post: Prism as a System One decision model, scoring 71.8 across three decision indices at a 44 ms median on one B200, with the category credited to TypeSafe AI’s Jev. Benchmark figures are Sarvam’s own testing, run on the same hardware.
Reasoning Model · Thinking model
A model trained to spend tokens thinking before it answers.
Evaluation · Evals
How you know the system is actually working.
Benchmark
A shared public test used to compare models.
Model Routing
Sending each request to the cheapest model that can handle it.
Agent
A model given tools, a goal and permission to keep going on its own.