--- title: Quorum emoji: ⚖️ colorFrom: red colorTo: gray sdk: static pinned: false license: mit --- # Quorum — ask the jury A jury of three tiny open models reads a message, each casts a vote, and Quorum returns the verdict with a confidence you can act on. Every example on the page is a **real test sentence** from one of seven public intent benchmarks (Banking77, CLINC150, HWU64, MASSIVE, MTOP, SNIPS, Bitext), so you can see when the jury gets it right — and when it doesn't. You can also type your own sentence and labels. - The page is static (`index.html` + `samples.json`) and calls a self-hosted Quorum API. Benchmark examples are answered instantly from the API's cache; your own sentences are computed live (the first one after a quiet spell takes a minute or two while the models wake up). Sentences you type are kept on the demo server so repeats answer instantly. - Run your own API: see [`serve/`](https://github.com/DataAgent-Lab/Quorum/tree/main/serve) and set `DEFAULT_API` in your copy of `index.html` (when the page is served from localhost, `?api=https://your-api.example` also works). - `samples.json` is generated from the per-item benchmark predictions: `python -m serve.export_demo_samples`. - Code + study: https://github.com/DataAgent-Lab/Quorum · Collection: https://huggingface.co/collections/DataAgent/quorum-6abb3255e0fab20d66add39b **Honest note.** This is the zero-shot tier: three models under 1B that run on a CPU, but *not* open zero-shot state-of-the-art. Measured on the same test sentences and label text, the closed model Jev is clearly ahead zero-shot on all five benchmarks we ran (Banking77: 0.803 vs 0.716 for this jury with an NLI juror never trained on Banking77). Banking77, MASSIVE and HWU64 are not fully held out here: the NLI juror's base model was trained on the Banking77 and MASSIVE train splits, and 44% of HWU64's test sentences appear in MASSIVE's train split. Only the 24-shot pipeline, with a 4B reader (gated LoRA adapter `DataAgent/Quorum-Reader-Qwen3-4B-Adapter`), ties Jev on Banking77 (0.932 vs 0.924, not significant; 0.936 vs 0.935 given the same retrieved examples). Details: https://academy.idataagent.com/research/quorum