InternScience Sage-A1.5 (35B-A3B)

One-line: Shanghai AI Laboratory’s (InternScience) 35B MoE agentic VL model — builds on Agents-A1 with explicit agentic orchestration (parallel spawn_subagent fan-out), an in-chain-of-thought verification mode, and open scientific discovery; lab-reported GAIA 95.1, SWE-bench Pro 61.2, SWE-bench Multilingual 72.7, PinchBench 90.0 at ~3B active params. Weights were uploaded quietly on 2026-10-15; the public launch (card + benchmark chart + arXiv report + FP8/GGUF siblings) landed 2026-10-21.

⚠ All numbers below are lab-reported (model card, arXiv 2610.28578). SWE-bench series uses mini-swe-agent at temp 1.0 / top-p 0.95, 200K context, offline (no internet) — the same harness family reflection and the DeepSeek cards use, so the numbers are roughly comparable across those cards. No independent evaluation yet as of 2026-10-22. Comparison cells are transcribed from competitors’ own reports; some are re-run by the Sage team under its own protocol, so cross-column comparisons are indicative, not controlled.

Coding benchmarks

BenchmarkScoreSource
HumanEval—not published
HumanEval+—not published
MBPP—not published
LiveCodeBench—not published
Aider polyglot—not published
SWE-bench Verified—not published (SWE-bench Pro / Multilingual instead)
SWE-bench Pro61.2lab — card (vs Agents-A1 43.6, Ornith-1.5 59.6, Kimi-K3 63.3, GLM-5.3 64.6)
SWE-bench Multilingual72.7lab — card (vs Agents-A1 58.7, Ornith-1.5 71.4)
SciCode44.3lab — card
MLE-Lite65.2lab — card (vs Agents-A1 43.9)

Agentic / tool-use benchmarks

BenchmarkScoreSource
BFCL—not published
τ-Bench—not published
ToolACE—not published
GAIA95.1lab — card (vs Kimi-K3 92.2, GLM-5.3 92.2, Agents-A1 96.0)
BrowseComp81.7 (82.8 with Agentic Orchestration)lab — card
Agents’ Last Exam (ALE-CLI)19.1lab — card
VitaBench45.4lab — card
PinchBench90.0lab — card (vs Kimi-K3 88.2, Ornith-1.5 88.6)
DeepResearch-Bench243.7 (47.5 with Agentic Orchestration)lab — card
Tool-use supportnative function calling; spawn_subagent parallel sub-agent schema; opt-in verification mode via chat-template flagcard (no BFCL/τ number published)

Reasoning (context only)

BenchmarkScoreSource
MMLU / MMLU-Pro—not published
GPQA Diamond—not published
MATH / AIME—not published
HLE (with tools)55.1lab — card
IFBench81.6lab — card (vs Kimi-K3 72.1)
AA-LCR v1.181.0lab — card
XBench-DS-251092.0lab — card
FrontierScience-Olympiad / Research81.0 / 48.3lab — card
CMT / ChemCOTBench / MatTools80.0 / 66.5 / 42.6lab — card
HiPhO / CritPt45.3 / 20.0lab — card
OmniDocBench91.5lab — card (VL input)

Efficiency

  • Active params: ≈3B active / 35B total (256 experts, top-8 routed + shared expert; 40 layers, hidden 2048; A3B class)
  • Context length: 262,144 native; 512k via YaRN (factor: 2.0), requires SGLANG_ALLOW_OVERWRITE_LONGER_CONTEXT_LEN=1 / VLLM_ALLOW_LONG_MAX_MODEL_LEN=1
  • VRAM (fp16 rough): ≈70 GB BF16 (14 shards) — comfortable on 2×48GB or 1×80GB; FP8 sibling created the same day plus Q4_K_M / Q8_0 / F16 GGUF siblings for local/llama.cpp paths
  • Runtime: stock Qwen3.5-MoE path in SGLang/vLLM/transformers (no custom code needed); tool-call parser qwen3_coder, reasoning parser qwen3; MTP speculative decoding supported; temp 1.0 / top-p 0.95 / top-k 20, presence_penalty 1.5
  • Text-only serving is possible (--language-model-only) to free the vision encoder’s KV budget

What makes it notable

The strongest published agentic-coder in the ~35B MoE class: SWE-bench Pro 61.2 and SWE-bench Multilingual 72.7 beat Agents-A1 by +17.6 / +14.0 pp and land within a few points of Kimi-K3 / GLM-5.3, while GAIA 95.1 is the top score in the card’s comparison set. It is also one of the few open models that ships agent-orchestration machinery in the weights rather than in a harness — a documented spawn_subagent tool contract for parallel isolated-context sub-agents and an opt-in verification mode that runs self-review inside the chain of thought. It is a VL model (image + video tokens in config), so it fits agentic browsing/document workflows; like MiniCPM-V-4.7 and Nemotron Super VL it is tracked here because it publishes coding/agentic evals. Provenance note: the repo’s commit history was super-squashed on 10-21, so the “initial upload” 10-15 vs launch 10-21 distinction comes from the file tree + sibling creation dates and the arXiv submission date.

See also