Downloads · 30 days
22
4% of all-time downloads
piykumar05i/pikoder-staff-engineer-14b
pikoder-staff-engineer-14b is a text generation model from piykumar05i. Use it when you need the model to write or continue text. It is set up for mlx. The card lists the license as mit.
A code generation model that thinks before it codes.
Downloads · 30 days
22
4% of all-time downloads
All-time downloads
621
Public
Parameters
14.8B
29.5 GB on disk
Likes
1
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.safetensors29.5 GB · 100%
From the Hugging Face model README
A code generation model that thinks before it codes.
Most code models optimize for autocomplete speed. This one was trained to reason like a staff engineer: explain the approach, discuss alternatives considered and rejected, flag production concerns, and then write the code. Trained on real architectural decisions from production systems -- not synthetic data, not textbook exercises.
| Capability | What It Does |
|---|---|
| Reasoning first | Every response begins with explicit reasoning about why before what |
| Alternatives discussed | Names approaches it considered and explains why it rejected them |
| Production concerns | Identifies error handling gaps, scale limits, monitoring needs, and operational risks |
| Multi-language | Go, Python, Java, and TypeScript -- trained on real patterns from each ecosystem |
| ADR-aware | Learned architectural decision records from production systems (e.g., "tools return structured data, agents apply intelligence") |
| Benchmark | Score | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Staff-Engineer Behavior | 10.5 / 12 (87.5%) | Reasoning depth, alternatives analysis, production concern identification |
| Code Quality Suite | 26 / 28 (93%) | 7-test suite: type safety, concurrency, complete files, Redis atomicity, Spring Boot patterns, TypeScript types, architectural knowledge |
| Test | Score |
|---|---|
| Go type safety (comma-ok assertions) | 4/4 |
| Go concurrency (mutex, goroutines) | 4/4 |
| Go complete compilable file | 4/4 |
| Python Redis atomicity (Lua scripts) | 4/4 |
| Java Spring Boot patterns | 4/4 |
| TypeScript discriminated unions | 2/4 |
| Architecture decision (ADR knowledge) | 4/4 |
| Total | 26/28 (93%) |
The model consistently produces responses that a senior engineer would recognize as staff-level thinking: the kind of code review comment that explains why the approach was chosen, not just what the code does.
from mlx_lm import load, generate
model, tokenizer = load("pikoder/pikoder-staff-engineer-14b")
messages = [
{"role": "system", "content": "You are a staff-level software engineer. Think step by step before writing code."},
{"role": "user", "content": "Write an HTTP client with retry and exponential backoff in Go"}
]
prompt = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(messages, add_generation_prompt=True, tokenize=False)
response = generate(model, tokenizer, prompt=prompt, max_tokens=2048)
print(response)
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
model_id = "pikoder/pikoder-staff-engineer-14b"
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(model_id)
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(model_id, device_map="auto")
messages = [
{"role": "system", "content": "You are a staff-level software engineer. Think step by step before writing code."},
{"role": "user", "content": "Design a rate limiter using Redis Lua scripts in Python"}
]
inputs = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(messages, return_tensors="pt", add_generation_prompt=True)
outputs = model.generate(inputs.to(model.device), max_new_tokens=2048)
print(tokenizer.decode(outputs[0][inputs.shape[-1]:], skip_special_tokens=True))
Prompt:
Write an HTTP client with retry and exponential backoff
What you get: Not just a retry loop. The model reasons about jitter to prevent thundering herds, discusses context.Context for cancellation, considers whether to retry on 429 vs 500 status codes differently, and flags that retry without idempotency guarantees can cause duplicate side effects.
Prompt:
Design a rate limiter using Redis Lua scripts
What you get: The model explains why Lua scripts are necessary (atomicity across MULTI/EXEC is insufficient for read-modify-write), compares sliding window vs fixed window vs token bucket algorithms, identifies the race condition that plain Redis commands create, and produces a complete implementation with proper error handling for Redis connection failures.
Prompt:
Should MCP tools return recommendations or raw data?
What you get: A structured architectural analysis grounded in the ADR-001 principle learned during training: tools should return structured data while agents apply intelligence. The model discusses separation of concerns, testability implications, and the coupling risks of embedding decision logic in tool implementations.
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Base model | Qwen3-14B (14.7B parameters) |
| Quantization | 4-bit |
| Architecture | Qwen3ForCausalLM |
| Hidden size | 5120 |
| Layers | 40 |
| Attention heads | 40 (8 KV heads, GQA) |
| Context length | 40,960 tokens |
| Vocabulary | 151,936 tokens |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Method | LoRA (Low-Rank Adaptation) |
| LoRA rank | 16 |
| LoRA alpha | 32 |
| LoRA scale | 2.0 |
| Dropout | 0.1 |
| Learning rate | 1e-4 |
| Batch size | 2 (effective 8 with gradient accumulation) |
| Training iterations | 200 |
| Best checkpoint | Selected by validation loss (1.114) |
| Framework | MLX (mlx-lm 0.31.3) |
| Hardware | Apple M4 Pro, 48 GB unified memory |
| Peak memory | 14 GB |
218 curated examples drawn from real production codebases:
| Source | Description |
|---|---|
| 16 ADRs | Architectural Decision Records documenting real design choices with context, alternatives, and consequences |
| 24 convention files | Coding standards, naming conventions, error handling patterns across Go, Python, Java, TypeScript |
| Git history patterns | Commit patterns, PR descriptions, and code review discussions from production repositories |
| Code patterns | Production implementations demonstrating idiomatic patterns in each language |
Language distribution: Go (35%) / Python (35%) / Java (20%) / TypeScript (10%)
Every training example follows the same structure the model now produces: reasoning, alternatives considered, production concerns, then implementation. No synthetic data -- every example originated from real engineering decisions.
The model was trained with this system prompt baked into every example:
You are a staff-level software engineer. Think step by step before writing code.
For best results, include this system prompt (or a variation of it) when generating.
Best for:
Not designed for:
This model was trained entirely on consumer hardware: a single Apple M4 Pro with 48 GB unified memory. Peak training memory usage was 14 GB, completing 200 iterations in a single session. No cloud GPUs were used.
MIT
@misc{pikoder-staff-engineer-14b,
title={pikoder-staff-engineer-14b: A Staff-Engineer Code Model},
author={Piyush Kumar},
year={2025},
url={https://huggingface.co/pikoder/pikoder-staff-engineer-14b}
}