---
title: Granite Switch Tiny
emoji: 🛡️
colorFrom: yellow
colorTo: purple
sdk: gradio
sdk_version: 6.5.1
app_file: app.py
pinned: false
license: apache-2.0
models:
- barha/granite-switch-4.0-350m-cti
---

# Granite Switch 4.0 350M — CTI Technique Mapping

A [Gradio](https://gradio.app) demo for
[`barha/granite-switch-4.0-350m-cti`](https://huggingface.co/barha/granite-switch-4.0-350m-cti).

Enter a piece of cyber threat intelligence (CTI) text describing adversary
behavior. The demo runs the **same base model twice on the same prompt** and
shows the results side by side:

- **Adapter OFF** — the plain `ibm-granite/granite-4.0-350m` base. It answers in
  prose and rarely produces a clean technique ID.
- **Adapter ON** — the embedded `cti-technique-mapping` LoRA is fired by a single
  control token, and the model emits one
  [MITRE ATT&CK](https://attack.mitre.org/) technique ID (e.g. `T1059.001`), which
  the Space then resolves to its official technique **name**.

The model is a Granite Switch composition of the `ibm-granite/granite-4.0-350m`
base with a `cti-technique-mapping` LoRA adapter (attention + MLP coverage). The
adapter is activated by the `<|cti-technique-mapping|>` control token, which the
chat template inserts when `adapter_name="cti-technique-mapping"` is passed to
`apply_chat_template` — that single difference is the entire "switch". The model
is loaded locally in the Space using the
[`granite-switch`](https://pypi.org/project/granite-switch/) package (`[hf]` backend).

The user input is wrapped in the exact instruction format the adapter was trained
on — `What ATT&CK technique does the following CTI procedure sentence describe?`
followed by the sentence inside `<cti>...</cti>` tags.

The ID→name lookup uses `mitre_id_to_name.json`, built from the official
[mitre-attack/attack-stix-data](https://github.com/mitre-attack/attack-stix-data)
Enterprise bundle (697 techniques + sub-techniques), bundled in the Space so no
network call is needed at inference.

> **Note:** the adapter was trained on the **top-10 most frequent** techniques in
> its source dataset, so inputs outside those classes may map to a near-but-imperfect
> ID. The demo's point is the *base-vs-adapter behavior difference*, not exhaustive
> ATT&CK coverage.