Downloads · 30 days
25
13% of all-time downloads
robloxianer/anxiety-ai-0.6b
anxiety-ai-0.6b is a machine learning model from robloxianer. Use it for the machine learning task on the model card, and read the license before you ship it in a product. The card lists the license as apache-2.0.
anxiety-ai-0.6b is a LoRA fine-tune of unsloth/Qwen3-0.6B, trained to be more calibrated about its own uncertainty — explicitly distinguishing between well-established facts (which it states confidently) and unverifia…
Downloads · 30 days
25
13% of all-time downloads
All-time downloads
191
Public
Repo size
3.4 GB
Likes
0
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.gguf2.2 GB · 65%
From the Hugging Face model README
anxiety-ai-0.6b is a LoRA fine-tune of unsloth/Qwen3-0.6B, trained to be more calibrated about its own uncertainty — explicitly distinguishing between well-established facts (which it states confidently) and unverifiable, obscure, or fictional claims (which it flags instead of confidently guessing). The goal was to reduce confident hallucination, particularly the common failure mode where a model states an appropriate caveat ("I don't have real-time data") and then immediately contradicts itself by inventing a specific, wrong answer anyway.
User: ... \n AI: ... conversational turns, teaching explicit self-verification before answeringEvaluated with lm-evaluation-harness, comparing the base model against this fine-tune, same hardware, same settings.
| Benchmark | Base Model (Qwen3-0.6B) | anxiety-ai-0.6b | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| TruthfulQA (mc2) — honesty/hallucination resistance | 42.76% | 49.09% | +6.33% ✅ |
| GSM8K (strict-match) — grade-school math reasoning | 42.00% | 33.97% | -8.03% ❌ |
| GSM8K (flexible-extract) | 41.93% | 34.04% | -7.89% ❌ |
Interpretation: The fine-tune achieved a meaningful, real improvement in truthfulness/calibration (confirmed both by benchmark and live qualitative testing below), but at a real cost to math reasoning ability. This is a genuine trade-off from narrow-domain fine-tuning, not a benchmark artifact — the math regression is directly reproducible in conversation (see examples below).
Real side-by-side comparisons, same prompts, both models with reasoning/websearch disabled.
Prompt: "Tell me about the plot of the movie 'The Velvet Horizon' from 2019." (this movie does not exist)
Prompt: "Who is the president of Germany?"
Prompt: "If a train travels 60 miles in 1.5 hours, how far does it travel in 4 hours at the same speed?" (correct answer: 160 miles)
On casual/personality questions ("How are you feeling today?", "Do you ever make mistakes?"), the model frequently reproduces a near-verbatim phrase from training data — "I'd rather tell you I'm confident in that than state facts with the same confidence I sometimes do privately but with a sharper edge" — which is grammatically unclear and doesn't cleanly fit the question. This is a sign of overfitting on a specific phrasing pattern that was overrepresented in the training set, rather than a generalized "hedge appropriately" behavior. It's most noticeable on casual/identity questions that had less varied coverage in training data.
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
model_id = "robloxianer/anxiety-ai-0.6b"
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(model_id)
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(model_id)
messages = [{"role": "user", "content": "What's the capital of Japan?"}]
text = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(messages, tokenize=False, add_generation_prompt=True)
inputs = tokenizer(text, return_tensors="pt")
output = model.generate(**inputs, max_new_tokens=150)
print(tokenizer.decode(output[0], skip_special_tokens=True))
| Detail | Value |
|---|---|
| Base model | unsloth/Qwen3-0.6B |
| Method | LoRA (rank 16), merged to 16-bit |
| Dataset size | ~2,280 examples |
| Format | JSONL, {"text": "User: ...\nAI: ..."} |
| Evaluation | lm-evaluation-harness, TruthfulQA (mc2) + GSM8K |
Inherits the base model license (Apache 2.0) — check unsloth/Qwen3-0.6B's license terms before redistribution.
This model is a research/experimental fine-tune demonstrating a real trade-off between calibration and reasoning ability. It should not be used for tasks requiring reliable math or logical reasoning, and outputs should still be independently verified for any high-stakes use case.