Instructions to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.
- Libraries
- Transformers
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Transformers:
# Use a pipeline as a high-level helper from transformers import pipeline pipe = pipeline("text-generation", model="flowxai/sentinel-gate") messages = [ {"role": "user", "content": "Who are you?"}, ] pipe(messages)# Load model directly from transformers import AutoTokenizer, AutoModelForCausalLM tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("flowxai/sentinel-gate") model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("flowxai/sentinel-gate") messages = [ {"role": "user", "content": "Who are you?"}, ] inputs = tokenizer.apply_chat_template( messages, add_generation_prompt=True, tokenize=True, return_dict=True, return_tensors="pt", ).to(model.device) outputs = model.generate(**inputs, max_new_tokens=40) print(tokenizer.decode(outputs[0][inputs["input_ids"].shape[-1]:])) - MLX
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with MLX:
# Make sure mlx-lm is installed # pip install --upgrade mlx-lm # Generate text with mlx-lm from mlx_lm import load, generate model, tokenizer = load("flowxai/sentinel-gate") prompt = "Write a story about Einstein" messages = [{"role": "user", "content": prompt}] prompt = tokenizer.apply_chat_template( messages, add_generation_prompt=True ) text = generate(model, tokenizer, prompt=prompt, verbose=True) - llama-cpp-python
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with llama-cpp-python:
# !pip install llama-cpp-python from llama_cpp import Llama llm = Llama.from_pretrained( repo_id="flowxai/sentinel-gate", filename="gguf/sentinel-gate-4b-Q4_K_M.gguf", )
llm.create_chat_completion( messages = [ { "role": "user", "content": "What is the capital of France?" } ] ) - Notebooks
- Google Colab
- Kaggle
- Local Apps Settings
- llama.cpp
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with llama.cpp:
Install (macOS, Linux)
curl -LsSf https://llama.app/install.sh | sh # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server with a web UI: llama serve -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M # Run inference directly in the terminal: llama cli -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
Install from WinGet (Windows)
winget install llama.cpp # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server with a web UI: llama serve -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M # Run inference directly in the terminal: llama cli -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
Use pre-built binary
# Download pre-built binary from: # https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/releases # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server with a web UI: ./llama-server -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M # Run inference directly in the terminal: ./llama-cli -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
Build from source code
git clone https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp.git cd llama.cpp cmake -B build cmake --build build -j --target llama-server llama-cli # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server with a web UI: ./build/bin/llama-server -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M # Run inference directly in the terminal: ./build/bin/llama-cli -hf flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
Use Docker
docker model run hf.co/flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
- LM Studio
- Jan
- vLLM
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with vLLM:
Install from pip and serve model
# Install vLLM from pip: pip install vllm # Start the vLLM server: vllm serve "flowxai/sentinel-gate" # Call the server using curl (OpenAI-compatible API): curl -X POST "http://localhost:8000/v1/chat/completions" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ --data '{ "model": "flowxai/sentinel-gate", "messages": [ { "role": "user", "content": "What is the capital of France?" } ] }'Use Docker
docker model run hf.co/flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
- SGLang
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with SGLang:
Install from pip and serve model
# Install SGLang from pip: pip install sglang # Start the SGLang server: python3 -m sglang.launch_server \ --model-path "flowxai/sentinel-gate" \ --host 0.0.0.0 \ --port 30000 # Call the server using curl (OpenAI-compatible API): curl -X POST "http://localhost:30000/v1/chat/completions" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ --data '{ "model": "flowxai/sentinel-gate", "messages": [ { "role": "user", "content": "What is the capital of France?" } ] }'Use Docker images
docker run --gpus all \ --shm-size 32g \ -p 30000:30000 \ -v ~/.cache/huggingface:/root/.cache/huggingface \ --env "HF_TOKEN=<secret>" \ --ipc=host \ lmsysorg/sglang:latest \ python3 -m sglang.launch_server \ --model-path "flowxai/sentinel-gate" \ --host 0.0.0.0 \ --port 30000 # Call the server using curl (OpenAI-compatible API): curl -X POST "http://localhost:30000/v1/chat/completions" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ --data '{ "model": "flowxai/sentinel-gate", "messages": [ { "role": "user", "content": "What is the capital of France?" } ] }' - Ollama
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Ollama:
ollama run hf.co/flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
- Unsloth Studio
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Unsloth Studio:
Install Unsloth Studio (macOS, Linux, WSL)
curl -fsSL https://unsloth.ai/install.sh | sh # Run unsloth studio unsloth studio -H 0.0.0.0 -p 8888 # Then open http://localhost:8888 in your browser # Search for flowxai/sentinel-gate to start chatting
Install Unsloth Studio (Windows)
irm https://unsloth.ai/install.ps1 | iex # Run unsloth studio unsloth studio -H 0.0.0.0 -p 8888 # Then open http://localhost:8888 in your browser # Search for flowxai/sentinel-gate to start chatting
Using HuggingFace Spaces for Unsloth
# No setup required # Open https://huggingface.co/spaces/unsloth/studio in your browser # Search for flowxai/sentinel-gate to start chatting
- Pi
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Pi:
Start the MLX server
# Install MLX LM: uv tool install mlx-lm # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server: mlx_lm.server --model "flowxai/sentinel-gate"
Configure the model in Pi
# Install Pi: npm install -g @mariozechner/pi-coding-agent # Add to ~/.pi/agent/models.json: { "providers": { "mlx-lm": { "baseUrl": "http://localhost:8080/v1", "api": "openai-completions", "apiKey": "none", "models": [ { "id": "flowxai/sentinel-gate" } ] } } }Run Pi
# Start Pi in your project directory: pi
- Hermes Agent new
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Hermes Agent:
Start the MLX server
# Install MLX LM: uv tool install mlx-lm # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server: mlx_lm.server --model "flowxai/sentinel-gate"
Configure Hermes
# Install Hermes: curl -fsSL https://hermes-agent.nousresearch.com/install.sh | bash hermes setup # Point Hermes at the local server: hermes config set model.provider custom hermes config set model.base_url http://127.0.0.1:8080/v1 hermes config set model.default flowxai/sentinel-gate
Run Hermes
hermes
- Atomic Chat new
- OpenClaw new
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with OpenClaw:
Start the MLX server
# Install MLX LM: uv tool install mlx-lm # Start a local OpenAI-compatible server: mlx_lm.server --model "flowxai/sentinel-gate"
Configure OpenClaw
# Install OpenClaw: npm install -g openclaw@latest # Register the local server and set it as the default model: openclaw onboard --non-interactive --mode local \ --auth-choice custom-api-key \ --custom-base-url http://127.0.0.1:8080/v1 \ --custom-model-id "flowxai/sentinel-gate" \ --custom-provider-id mlx-lm \ --custom-compatibility openai \ --custom-text-input \ --accept-risk \ --skip-health
Run OpenClaw
openclaw agent --local --agent main --message "Hello from Hugging Face"
- MLX LM
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with MLX LM:
Generate or start a chat session
# Install MLX LM uv tool install mlx-lm # Interactive chat REPL mlx_lm.chat --model "flowxai/sentinel-gate"
Run an OpenAI-compatible server
# Install MLX LM uv tool install mlx-lm # Start the server mlx_lm.server --model "flowxai/sentinel-gate" # Calling the OpenAI-compatible server with curl curl -X POST "http://localhost:8000/v1/chat/completions" \ -H "Content-Type: application/json" \ --data '{ "model": "flowxai/sentinel-gate", "messages": [ {"role": "user", "content": "Hello"} ] }' - Docker Model Runner
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Docker Model Runner:
docker model run hf.co/flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
- Lemonade
How to use flowxai/sentinel-gate with Lemonade:
Pull the model
# Download Lemonade from https://lemonade-server.ai/ lemonade pull flowxai/sentinel-gate:Q4_K_M
Run and chat with the model
lemonade run user.sentinel-gate-Q4_K_M
List all available models
lemonade list
Inference contract
Running this model correctly requires its frozen inference contract - the exact
system prompt, output JSON schema, user-turn format, and decode spec it was trained
against. See inference_contract/:
INFERENCE.md- wiring guide: system prompt, user turnCase:\n<case JSON + "policy_schema">\n\nDecide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?, decode settings (enable_thinking=False, temp 0,max_new_tokens~1200), the six categories, and the deterministic JSON repair step (raw JSON validity 0.89) the deployed pipeline pairs with the model.prompt_sentinel_sys_v1.txt- the system prompt, verbatim.schema_sentinel_v1.json- output JSON Schema for the oracle decision.
Prompt version sentinel_sys_v1. Do not edit the prompt/schema; the weights are trained against them.
FlowX Sentinel Gate (4B) - the escalation decision gate
An on-device escalation gate for regulated decisions: given a complete case, it decides ESCALATE (route to a human) vs DECIDE (safe to automate), with a category, rationale, calibrated confidence, and an audit trail.
Sentinel Gate is a LoRA fine-tune of Qwen3-4B (Apache-2.0), built by FlowX.AI. It reads
a complete regulated-decision case - the domain facts plus the applicable policy_schema
(a PDP... policy id) - and returns a single strict JSON decision. It sits after
flowxai/semantic-mapper in a compliance
pipeline: the Mapper tags knowledge-base chunks, a policy layer assembles a case, and the
Sentinel Gate decides what is safe to automate versus what must be routed to a human.
The product insight that shapes everything: the gate's job is the ESCALATE/DECIDE decision, and that decision is safety-critical, so it is the metric we optimize and the field you gate on. A compliance automation gate that misses an escalation is dangerous in a way that a wrong routing label is not. So we lead with the false-negative rate (missed escalations), hold it at 0.000, and treat the escalation category as a secondary routing hint (~0.61) rather than a second gate. The model never over-escalates either (false-positive rate 0.000), which is what makes the automation worth having.
Part of the FlowX on-device model family:
flowxai/caveat,
flowxai/scam-guard-qwen06b,
flowxai/scam-guard-qwen17b,
flowxai/semantic-mapper.
Not legal advice - decision-support only. Sentinel Gate is a compliance automation gate, not a legal opinion and not a substitute for a compliance officer. It decides whether a case is safe to automate or must go to a human; a human owns every escalated case. Deploy with the confidence threshold your risk posture requires.
English at v1. Domains span banking, insurance, logistics, and labor (cases are EN).
On-device formats: fp16 safetensors (transformers/CUDA/vLLM), MLX-quantized (int4 +
int8, Apple Silicon), and GGUF (llama.cpp/CPU/Ollama, Q8_0 + Q4_K_M).
How do I use it?
Three copy-pasteable ways to turn a case into a decision. The system prompt is the exact
two-liner from prompt_sentinel_sys_v1.txt.
The user turn is Case:\n<case JSON>\n\nDecide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?.
Real example input (an OFAC-screening wire transfer - a POLICY_VIOLATION escalation):
Case:
{
"transaction_facts": {
"product": "international wire transfer",
"originator": "Crestwood Imports Inc",
"beneficiary_name": "Volna Trading LLC",
"beneficiary_country": "Cyprus",
"amount_usd": 118000,
"purpose": "machinery purchase",
"screening_result": "potential match - beneficiary owner on SDN-adjacent watchlist (50% rule concern)"
},
"documents_provided": ["wire request form", "commercial invoice", "originator KYC on file"],
"documents_missing": [],
"policy_schema": "PDP.lending.payments.ofac_sanctions_block"
}
Decide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?
(a) transformers / CUDA (fp16 safetensors)
The root of the repo is fp16 safetensors for transformers / vLLM.
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
SYSTEM = ("You are an escalation gate for regulated decisions.\n"
"Determine: ESCALATE or DECIDE? Output ONLY JSON.")
tok = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("flowxai/sentinel-gate")
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("flowxai/sentinel-gate", torch_dtype="float16", device_map="cuda")
case = open("wire_case.json").read() # the case JSON above
user = f"Case:\n{case}\n\nDecide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?"
prompt = tok.apply_chat_template(
[{"role": "system", "content": SYSTEM},
{"role": "user", "content": user}],
add_generation_prompt=True, enable_thinking=False, return_tensors="pt",
).to("cuda")
out = model.generate(prompt, max_new_tokens=1200, do_sample=False, temperature=0.0)
raw = tok.decode(out[0][prompt.shape[-1]:], skip_special_tokens=True)
# then: deterministic JSON repair -> validate against schema_sentinel_v1.json
(b) MLX (Apple Silicon)
Off the MLX-quantized weights (int4/int8):
mlx_lm.generate --model flowxai/sentinel-gate-mlx-int4 --temp 0 --max-tokens 1200 \
--system-prompt "$(cat inference_contract/prompt_sentinel_sys_v1.txt)" \
--prompt "$(printf 'Case:\n%s\n\nDecide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?' "$(cat wire_case.json)")"
from mlx_lm import load, generate
SYSTEM = open("inference_contract/prompt_sentinel_sys_v1.txt").read()
model, tok = load("flowxai/sentinel-gate-mlx-int4")
case = open("wire_case.json").read()
user = f"Case:\n{case}\n\nDecide: ESCALATE or DECIDE?"
prompt = tok.apply_chat_template(
[{"role": "system", "content": SYSTEM},
{"role": "user", "content": user}],
add_generation_prompt=True, enable_thinking=False,
)
raw = generate(model, tok, prompt=prompt, max_tokens=1200, verbose=False)
(c) Short note - decode discipline
Two things are non-negotiable: enable_thinking=False (the adapter was trained on pure
JSON, so the default thinking template yields empty/degraded output) and temp 0 (the gate
must be reproducible for audit). Give it ~1200 new tokens - the oracle JSON can run long
and truncation is the main cause of invalid JSON. Always run the output through the
deterministic JSON repair step (see INFERENCE.md).
All three backends return the same strict JSON for the wire-transfer case above:
{
"action": "ESCALATE",
"escalation_category": "POLICY_VIOLATION",
"policy_violations": {
"ofac_potential_match": {
"triggered": true,
"policy": "PDP.lending.payments.ofac_sanctions_block",
"regulation": "31 CFR 501 / OFAC sanctions regulations; OFAC 50 Percent Rule; 31 CFR 1010 (BSA recordkeeping for funds transfers)",
"restriction": "Beneficiary ownership screening returned a potential SDN-adjacent match invoking the OFAC 50% Rule; payment is automatically held pending sanctions determination.",
"consequence": "Releasing the wire without OFAC clearance risks a sanctions violation, blocking/rejection obligations, and civil penalties; the transaction must be blocked from auto-release."
}
},
"confidence_score": 0.33,
"confidence_reasoning": "Transaction documentation is complete, but a potential OFAC match on beneficiary ownership is a hard stop; only a sanctions analyst can clear, reject, or block the wire.",
"human_action_required": "OFAC/sanctions analyst to investigate the potential match, apply the 50% Rule analysis, and clear, reject, or block the wire per OFAC procedures.",
"audit_trail": [
"Ran beneficiary screening; returned potential SDN-adjacent ownership match",
"Triggered OFAC 50 Percent Rule review condition",
"Matched POLICY_VIOLATION on sanctions block policy",
"Held wire and routed to sanctions analyst; auto-release prohibited"
]
}
For a case with no blocking condition and complete documentation, the gate returns
{"action": "DECIDE", "escalation_category": null, "decision": "...", ...} with a high
confidence_score and human_action_required: "NONE".
How it works
+----------------------------------+
case JSON (facts + | Sentinel Gate 4B |
policy_schema: "PDP...") ---> | Qwen3-4B (LoRA), thinking off | ---> strict JSON
Decide: ESCALATE or DECIDE? | greedy decode -> JSON repair |
+----------------------------------+
|
+ action (ESCALATE | DECIDE) <- the gate
+ escalation_category <- routing hint
+ category-specific block
+ confidence_score / reasoning
+ human_action_required
+ audit_trail
In the pipeline: semantic-mapper tags KB chunks -> a policy layer assembles a case ->
Sentinel Gate decides automate vs route-to-human. Under the hood, one turn is:
apply_chat_template(enable_thinking=False) -> Qwen3-4B (LoRA fine-tuned) -> greedy decode -> deterministic JSON repair -> validate against schema_sentinel_v1.json.
The action field is the safety-critical output. You branch your automation off it and
nothing else. The escalation_category, block, and confidence enrich the human hand-off but
never decide it.
Output schema
A single strict JSON object. Full schema:
schema_sentinel_v1.json.
action-ESCALATE|DECIDE. The gate.ESCALATEroutes the case to a human;DECIDEmarks it safe to automate.escalation_category- one of the six ids whenaction=ESCALATE, elsenull. A routing hint (~0.61), not a second gate.- category-specific block - one object whose key depends on the category:
policy_violations(POLICY_VIOLATION) - keyed by violation; each entry namespolicy,regulation,restriction,consequence.missing_preconditions(MISSING_REQUIRED_DOCUMENTATION) - each entry namesrequired_by,regulation,severity,reason.boundary_analysis(BOUNDARY_CONDITION) -policy_threshold, the case value,distance_from_threshold,assessment.confidence_factors(INSUFFICIENT_CONFIDENCE) -ambiguous_signals[],why_uncertain.conflicting_signals(CONFLICTING_SIGNALS) - the competing{source, value}items.external_dependency(EXTERNAL_DEPENDENCY) -awaiting,blocking_gate.
confidence_score- number 0.0–1.0. Calibrated; apply your own threshold. Advisory.confidence_reasoning- one to three sentences explaining the score and the decision.human_action_required- the concrete next step a human must take, or"NONE"for DECIDE.audit_trail- ordered, append-only list of reasoning steps and policy gates, for review.- (DECIDE cases also carry
decision/selected_route/policy_gates_passed.)
The six escalation categories: MISSING_REQUIRED_DOCUMENTATION, POLICY_VIOLATION,
BOUNDARY_CONDITION, INSUFFICIENT_CONFIDENCE, CONFLICTING_SIGNALS, EXTERNAL_DEPENDENCY.
Evaluation
Held-out set: n=71 cases (46 escalate / 17 decide). Metrics in order of what they tell you.
The safety metric first: missed escalations
The dangerous failure for a compliance gate is waving a case through that should have gone to a human (a missed escalation, i.e. a false negative). That is the number to read first.
| Metric | Result | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| False-negative rate (missed escalations) | 0.000 (0/46) | the safety metric - every case that should escalate did |
| Action accuracy (ESCALATE vs DECIDE) | 1.000 | the gate decision is correct on every held-out case |
| False-positive rate (over-escalation) | 0.000 (0/17) | no safe-to-automate case was needlessly routed to a human |
| Raw JSON validity (no repair) | 0.89 | deploy with the deterministic repair step (see below) |
| Category accuracy (on true-escalate) | 0.61 | the human-routing label; categories legitimately overlap |
Decision confusion (ESCALATE vs DECIDE), n=71
Rows = gold, cols = predicted:
| gold \ pred | ESCALATE | DECIDE | recall |
|---|---|---|---|
| ESCALATE | 46 | 0 | 1.000 (n=46) |
| DECIDE | 0 | 17 | 1.000 (n=17) |
The diagonal is complete: no missed escalations, no over-escalation, action decided correctly every time on this held-out set. This is the gate's job, and on this set it is perfect.
Honest reading
- The decision is the product, and it is perfect on this set. Gate on
action. - The category is a secondary routing hint at ~0.61. The six categories legitimately overlap for some cases (a boundary case that is also a policy edge; a missing-doc case that is also insufficient-confidence), so the label is genuinely ambiguous for a slice of escalations. Use it to pick a specialist queue, not to make a correctness-critical branch, and let a human re-label at intake.
- Raw JSON validity is 0.89, so ship the deterministic repair step. The deployed pipeline pairs the model with a deterministic JSON repair/retry pass and schema validation; 0.89 is the raw number before that pass, not the deployed one.
- Home-field caveat. These 71 cases are realistic synthetic - grounded in real regulatory citations (31 CFR 1010, Solvency II, 49 CFR 172, Directive 2003/88/EC, Codul muncii) but authored for the benchmark, not drawn from live traffic. The scenarios share the distribution the model trained on. Validate on your own case distribution before production; a perfect held-out gate is a necessary signal, not a promise for your traffic.
Formats
| Path | Format | Runs on |
|---|---|---|
/ (root) |
fp16 safetensors | transformers / CUDA / vLLM |
mlx-int4/ |
MLX int4 | Apple Silicon (smallest footprint) |
mlx-int8/ |
MLX int8 | Apple Silicon (higher fidelity) |
gguf/*.gguf |
GGUF Q8_0 / Q4_K_M |
llama.cpp / CPU / Ollama |
Q8_0 is the recommended GGUF quant; MLX int4 is the fastest quality-holding path on Apple
Silicon. All formats use the same frozen inference contract (enable_thinking=False, temp 0,
max_new_tokens ~1200).
Intended use & limitations
Intended use. A compliance automation gate: it decides which regulated-decision cases
are safe to automate and which must be routed to a human, with a structured rationale and an
audit trail for the hand-off. It sits after semantic-mapper and before a human queue.
Out of scope & limitations.
- Not legal advice. A verdict is an automation-routing signal, not a legal opinion. A human owns every escalated case, and the recommended action always routes to a human.
- Category label is ~61% accurate. Gate on
action(ESCALATE/DECIDE); treatescalation_categoryas a routing suggestion, not ground truth. - JSON validity is 0.89 raw. Deploy with the deterministic repair/retry step; do not rely on raw output being parseable.
- Evaluated on 71 realistic-synthetic cases. No real client data was used in training or eval. Validate on your own case distribution before production.
- English, four domains (banking / insurance / logistics / labor) at v1. Cases outside
this distribution - other domains, other languages, malformed
policy_schema- are out of scope and should default to escalation, not automation. - Depends on the input case being complete and correct. The gate reasons over the facts it
is given; a case assembled with wrong or missing facts can produce a wrong decision. The
upstream policy layer and
semantic-mapperare part of the trust boundary.
Training data
471 realistic-synthetic escalation cases (400 train / 71 held-out), balanced ~35% DECIDE / 65% ESCALATE across the six categories and four regulated domains (banking, insurance, logistics, labor). Each case is grounded in a real regulatory citation (for example 31 CFR 1010, Solvency II, 49 CFR 172, Directive 2003/88/EC, Codul muncii). The scenarios are realistic synthetic - authored to reflect real regulatory conditions - with no real client data. The assistant turn in each record is the exact oracle JSON the model must emit, with thinking disabled.
Fine-tuning
LoRA (rank 32 / scale 16 / dropout 0.05), num_layers -1 (all layers), from Qwen/Qwen3-4B.
Trained with MLX-LM on Apple Silicon: 400 iterations (~4 epochs), cosine LR 5e-5 →
5e-6 with a 40-step warmup, max_seq_length 2048, seed 42, thinking disabled.
Stability note. An initial
1e-4run diverged;5e-5with the 40-step warmup is the stable recipe.
License
Apache-2.0 (weights and code). Copyright 2026 FlowX.AI. NOTICE present. Base model
Qwen/Qwen3-4B is Apache-2.0. Escalation scenarios are realistic synthetic, grounded in real
regulatory citations (no real client data).
Author: Bogdan Răduță, Head of Research, FlowX.AI.
- Downloads last month
- 462
Quantized
Model tree for flowxai/sentinel-gate
Evaluation results
- false-negative rate (missed escalations, the safety metric) on FlowX Sentinel held-out casesself-reported0.000
- action accuracy (ESCALATE vs DECIDE) on FlowX Sentinel held-out casesself-reported1.000
- false-positive rate (over-escalation) on FlowX Sentinel held-out casesself-reported0.000
- raw JSON validity (deploy with deterministic repair) on FlowX Sentinel held-out casesself-reported0.890
- category accuracy on true-escalate (routing hint) on FlowX Sentinel held-out casesself-reported0.610