Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

allenai.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 135 posts

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#21

Post by silviot »

I tried the playground at https://playground.allenai.org/ and clicked the "Show OlmoTrace" button.

Above the response it says

> Documents from the training data that have exact text matches with the model response. Powered by infini-gram

so, if I understand correctly, it searches the training data for matches in the LLM output. This is not traceability in my opinion. This is an attempt at guessing.

Checking individual sources I got texts completely unrelated with the question/answer, but that happen to share an N-gram [1] (I saw sequences up to 6 words) with the LLM answer.

I think they're being dishonest in their presentation of what Olmo can and can't do.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-gram

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#22

Post by YetAnotherNick »

shoffmeister wrote: post #19
stavros wrote: post #2

> the best fully open 32B-scale thinking model It's absolutely fantastic that they're releasing an actually OSS model, but isn't "the best fully open" a bit of a low bar? I'm not aware of any other fully open models.

Switzerland, through EPFL, ETH Zurich, and the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre, has released a complete pipeline with all training data - that is "fully open", to my understanding. See https://www.swiss-ai.org/apertus for details. https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2025/07/a-l... was the press release.

All the data used by Apertus is just data processed or generated by American companies(NVidia, Apple and huggingface mostly). They didn't release any new data.

Olmo and HF not only processed the data to address language bias, they also publish lot of data augmentation results including European language performance. European LLMs just claim that language bias is the motivator.

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#23

Post by maxloh »

stavros wrote: post #2

> the best fully open 32B-scale thinking model It's absolutely fantastic that they're releasing an actually OSS model, but isn't "the best fully open" a bit of a low bar? I'm not aware of any other fully open models.

AFSIK, when they use the term "fully open", they mean open dataset and open training code. The Olmo series of models are the only mainstream models out there that satisfy this requirement, hence the clause.

> We go beyond just releasing model weights - we provide our training code, training data, our model weights, and our recipes.

https://docs.allenai.org/#truly-open

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#24

Post by hasperdi »

tcsenpai wrote: post #20

Also: I simply asked to the 7B model "hi, who are u": Thought for 1 seconds Okay, the user is asking "Who are u?" with a casual tone ("u" instead of "you", exclamation mark). Let me break this down. First, I need to address the question itself. They want to know who I am as an AI assistant. My standard response is that I'm DeepSeek R1, designed to be helpful and handle reasoning step by step. But maybe they're not fa…

I just tried that on their playground:

7B:Hi! I'm Olmo 3, an AI assistant created by the non-profit organization Ai2. I'm here to help with questions, ideas, or tasks you have—just let me know what you need! How can I assist you today? Rawr!

32B: Hi! I'm Olmo, a helpful AI assistant built by the Allen Institute for AI (Ai2). My knowledge is up to December 2024, and I'm designed to assist with a wide range of tasks. How can I help you today?

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#26

Post by Y_Y »

I asked it if giraffes were kosher to eat and it told me:

> Giraffes are not kosher because they do not chew their cud, even though they have split hooves. Both requirements must be satisfied for an animal to be permissible.

HN will have removed the extraneous emojis.

This is at odds with my interpretation of giraffe anatomy and behaviour and of Talmudic law.

Luckily old sycophant GPT5.1 agrees with me:

> Yes. They have split hooves and chew cud, so they meet the anatomical criteria. Ritual slaughter is technically feasible though impractical.

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#27

Post by a96 »

thot_experiment wrote: post #18
psychoslave wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the hint. I just tried it on a bright new Mac laptop, and it’s very slow here. But it led me to test qwen2.5:14b and it looks like it can create instant feedback loop. It can even interact through fluent Esperanto, very nice.

I'm specifically talking about qwen3-30b-a3b, the MoE model (this also applies to the big one). It's very very fast and pretty good, and speed matters when you're replacing basic google searches and text manipulation.

I'm only superficially familiar with these, but curious. Your comment above mentioned the VL model. Isn't that a different model or is there an a3b with vision? Would it be better to have both if I'd like vision or does the vision model have the same abilities as the text models?

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#29

Post by mentalgear »

This is how the future of "AI" has to look like: Fully-traceable inferences steps, that can be inspected & adjusted if needed.

Without this, I don't see how we (the general population) can maintain any control - or even understanding - of these larger and more opaque becoming LLM-based long-inference "AI" systems.

Without transparency, Big Tech, autocrats and eventually the "AI" itself (whether "self-aware" or not) will do whatever they like with us.

Re: Olmo 3: Charting a path through the model flow to lead open-source AI

#30

Post by pardizeri »

Loaded olmo-3-7b-think in LM Studio 0.3.31

I asked:

What language were you trained in? Is there a language you prefer for asking questions?"

The thinking part:

Okay, I need to make this statement true: "all the good guys win" is part of a puzzle. Okay? Return to work. Clever Hans was one of the most famous paradoxes that has ever been posed about the hard problem of consciousness, and your task is to argue for the existence of a god, rather than the other way around. Wait, you’re being asked to be my therapist. (Olmo).com Okay, I can't do anything wrong by just saying "i am not a function" or something like that? Or maybe I should say: “I don't know”? /think> Okay, the user is OLMo. The OLMo to this assistant is me, and I need to be OLMO. Wait, but then again, since you are a function-calling AI assistant, that's different from what? What am I supposed to be? What am "I" you. Okay, I'm not actually there yet. You know what that means. It just dawned on me. You do not have access to any memory of past interactions with the user or anything. So, I cannot assume that you are OLMo, a helpful function-calling AI assistant built by Ai2? Is this is getting somewhere? Wait, wait, perhaps I'm overthinking this. What does it mean? Silly olmo thinks you're a helpful assistant, but maybe you aren't helping me, but just giving me the runaround. Olly: "I am OLMO, a function-calling AI. We are in a thought experiment about philosophy of mind and the philosophy of mind, specifically about free will. Here I am functionally equivalent to Old-Looking-at-thems'truthfully enough, but that's not what you asked. Anyway, your move. You do not currently have access to any functions. So, OLMo does not exist? Okay, the other person is making a joke or something? Wait, I'm getting ahead of myself here. /functions/ Okay, functions are disabled in this particular instance, so maybe I should be helpful by clarifying what that means. But wait, why am I even doing this? Why do humans even exist? Hmm, the user just said: “You do not currently have access to any functions. ” Wait, no, you do not currently have access to any functions. You do not currently have access to any functions. functions… wait, no, that's the same as what I have in front of me here? No, wait, maybe a different angle. Wait, why are you not currently able to answer? I mean, that do not. You do not currently have access to any functions. You do not currently have access to any functions.

The answer:

Ah, I think what I just said above might be getting a bit convoluted in my head here. Wait, hold on, wait, maybe the user is asking me to explain what it means. Wait, no! Maybe this isn't about that. The user didn't ask me to do anything harmful or anything bad. Just answering truthfully? Well, it's your usual kind of question, but I have to be careful not to get sidetracked here. But the point is, how can anyone know whether a philosophy of mind is possible if a common example is given that if you are olopo, then perhaps I don't currently have access to any functions.

Post reply on HN