pona-nanogpt-1

Model Card — pona-nanogpt-1 (v1, the conversational word arm)

A sup computer release — a small language model studio. Model page · monorepo (frozen code: projects/pona/models/pona-nanogpt-1/, tag pona-nanogpt-1) · runs in your browser at www.supcpu.com/interfaces.

The full experiment — whether span, not grammar class, predicts what a small model finds hard — is experiment 11.

What it is

A word-level Toki Pona GPT you can hold a conversation with. 2.73M params (6L/6H/192E, block 128) over a 370-token vocabulary — the ~130-word lexicon plus names, punctuation, and specials — small enough that the website's /pona chat renders the entire vocabulary as its keyboard. Trained from scratch on 6.93M characters of filtered Toki Pona (Toki Pona Wikipedia, the permissive subset of poki Lapo, Tatoeba) interleaved ×12 with 122 LLM-generated dialogues that survived an oracle filter: a dialogue entered the corpus only if every sentence passed the same grammar checker the model is scored by. Dialogue turns are - -prefixed lines. The model learns that a dash line answers the dash line before it — that convention is the whole chat contract the keyboard UI relies on.

Numbers that matter

Free-prose protocol, pinned before any model was scored: 1,000 raw unconditional sentences at t = 1.0, no top-k, the model's own punctuation as segment boundaries. The headline number is above the corpus's own pass rate — training denoised the data. The denominator exists because register drift is real: Wikipedia passes the oracle at only 86.9%.

Scoring

The oracle is telo misikeke (MIT), vendored at pinned commit 0a1852d, driven via node with the Linku word list. It passed a trust gate — 16 known-good pu sentences accepted, 7 known-bad flagged — before any number was reported. The headline metric fails a sentence on error-category issues only; the strict rate rides alongside. The oracle judges grammar, not meaning: an on-topic reply and a fluent non-sequitur can score the same.

Sampling: use temperature 0.8

Replies are 100.0% grammatical at t = 0.8 and 98.8% at 1.0, so the /pona interface and the reply numbers above both use 0.8. The trade is repetition: at low temperature the model reuses phrases within a reply. Free-prose benchmark numbers stay measured at t = 1.0.

Training

6 layers, 6 heads, 192 embed, block 128, dropout 0.1, batch 64; 1,500 steps at lr 3e-4 (beta2 0.99, warmup 50) on an M4 Mac (MPS), ~86ms/step — about three minutes. Best-val checkpointing. The dialogue mix cost nothing on the prose objective: val loss improved over the identical-recipe word arm (2.457 vs 2.512) while adding the reply behavior.

Limitations

• Pronoun deixis slips. mi/sina swaps — grammatical, wrong person. The oracle cannot see person errors, so the 100% reply number does not certify deixis; this is v1's known conversational tic.
• Question machinery is the weakest grammar. illFormedQuestion is the top reply nitpick (11 of 160 at t = 0.8); it is nitpick-class, so it rides outside the headline metric.
• Grammatical ≠ sensible. Every score is a grammar checker's; no eval here measures whether a reply is true, kind, or coherent beyond topic.
• One seed, one run; the char/word hazard comparison rests on single runs per arm.
• The corpus ceiling is 96.0% — scores approaching it say as much about the register mix as about the model.

Reproduce

The frozen folder (projects/pona/models/pona-nanogpt-1/) rebuilds everything in place: fetch_*.py → build_corpus.py → build_chat_corpus.py --reps 12 → prepare.py → train.py config.py, then harness.py for the oracle eval and chat_eval.py for replies. The 122-dialogue set ships pinned in the folder (dialogue.txt, sha1-verified against its committed manifest) because LLM sampling cannot regenerate it. Weights ship via the artifact URLs in registry.json, never in the tree.