All Jev resources
This is the full index of everything Jev: 2441 entries for TypeSafe AI's flagship System One model, from official documentation, SDKs, and cookbooks to community-built clients, MCP servers, agent tools, and write-ups. Every entry is tagged by category, format, and topic, and sorted newest first.
Filter by category or tag, or search titles, descriptions, authors, and repos. Open any card for its detail page — most entries carry a verified deep dive with highlights, caveats, and a quickstart snippet.
- Entries
- 2441
- Categories
- 11
- Official
- 99
- Community
- 2342
- Source sites
- 148
- Deep dives
- 2441
Last updated . Entries are added as they appear and re-checked when they are touched.
Browse Jev by category
11 ways into the ecosystem. Each category page leads with its own shortlist of starting points.
- Repos & SDKs202Client libraries, adapters, and source code you can build on with Jev, from the official Python and TypeScript SDKs to community ports in Go, .NET, and PHP.
- Integrations & Adapters146Framework, platform, gateway, and database integrations that put Jev inside the stack you already run, from LangChain and Pydantic AI to Postgres and Home Assistant.
- Agents & MCP313Agent runtimes, coding-agent gates and routers, MCP servers, and skill or context tooling that hand an agent Jev's typed decisions.
- Tools & CLIs466Standalone Jev CLIs, desktop apps, playgrounds, and utilities you run directly, from shell history and semantic search to dashboards and meters.
- Cookbooks94Official, runnable Jev recipes that show what decision models are good at, each with its own datasets, latencies, and numbers.
- Demos & Experiments380Playable demos, games, simulators, and experiments that put Jev in the loop, from Mario and drones to moderation firehoses and trading bots.
- Practices & Patterns278How to design Jev states, questions, and confidence gates the right way, from the official patterns to the failure modes worth designing around.
- Guides & Articles228Documentation, write-ups, and community hubs for learning Jev, from the canonical docs to independent tutorials and reviews.
- Benchmarks & Evaluations117Benchmarks, calibration studies, independent evaluations, and observability write-ups that measure how Jev actually behaves.
- Models & Reimplementations162Open reimplementations of Jev, retrained heads on small models, and inference-time tricks that reproduce the System One shape with other weights.
- Media & Talks55Videos, talks, podcasts, and news coverage about building with Jev.
Browse Jev by use case or industry
The same directory, sliced by what you are building and who you are building it for.
All 2441 Jev resources
Search the full directory, or filter by category and tag.
Showing 1–48 of 108 resources
A theoretical study of recalibrating many related yes/no questions that each have few labels, motivated by decision models such as Jev. It derives minimax compound-risk rates and shows pooled isotonic fitting with one per-question correction achieves them, while tuning questions separately loses a factor.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A benchmark evaluating Theory of Mind selection in typed decision models against generative baselines: 11,117 English questions from nine ToM benchmarks across six capability groups. TypeSafe Jev reaches 73.2% source-balanced accuracy and ranks first or second on every capability.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
HKUST-KnowComp/Jev-ToMPython
HKUST-KnowComp/Jev-ToMPythonA bias audit of typed decision models used as judges, running the CALM benchmark's bias tests on eight TDMs and seven LLM judges from 2024 and 2026. Every TDM is biased in three to eight of twelve tests, and emotional tone drops a typical TDM's accuracy from 99% to 42%.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A study of option-order sensitivity in System One models and a training-free fix called Runoff. It scores each option alone to keep a few candidates, then compares them with each candidate in every position, removing order dependence in two forward passes.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A benchmark providing exact instance-level class probabilities across three simulated text domains: peer review, covert information transfer, and credit risk. Because the data-generating process is defined, exact probabilities and Bayes error are computable, enabling KL-divergence scoring of reported probabilities.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A pre-registered study of whether jev-1.13.0 satisfies independence of irrelevant alternatives, using 299,463 calls on intent and topic classification. Every added option shifts the log-odds between the gold and strongest wrong label by 0.20–0.52 nats RMS, 1.2 to 3 times run-to-run variation.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A pre-registered evaluation of the commercial Jev model and open Laya-multilingual on Indonesian regional languages, using the parallel NusaX and NusaTranslation test sets. Jev is more accurate on sentences lexically closer to Indonesian, and the human Indonesian translation raises accuracy by up to 37.2 points.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
A benchmark for typed decision models such as Jev, built from seven policy-labelled generators and nine evaluation suites. It reports accuracy as medians across paraphrases, calibration against a matched noise floor, and realized cost under asymmetric cost matrices.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A comparison of JEV with LLMs and human coders on seven political science replications. JEV matches or approaches GPT-6 Luna and Qwen3.8-27B on many tasks, but the authors find no cost advantage over GPT-6 Luna at OpenAI's batch prices.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A model-independent benchmark for graph decision tasks, combining structural task profiles, matched graph-text input contrasts, and heuristic-proposal controls. It finds accurate adjacency recognition does not guarantee broader structural correctness.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
VictorYXL/GraphDecisionBenchPython
VictorYXL/GraphDecisionBenchPythonIntroduces JEVal, a bilingual benchmark of 11,257 instances from 36 datasets across 10 application domains, and evaluates 25 model configurations spanning general decision models and generative LLMs. It also proposes SII-Decision-4B and 27B, distilled models answering a typical query in about 0.1 s.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
0GitHub stars
A benchmark of rejection-policy transfer across Laya, Jev, and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct at equal calibration budgets, covering artificial omission, natural retrieval misses, and public out-of-scope queries. Source calibration often fails to preserve the target operating point.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
HATEDECIDE evaluates six decision-model configurations on four hate-speech datasets against specialized, zero-shot, commercial, and supervised baselines. The best hosted model comes within 1.6 macro-F1 points of the best commercial LLM at approximately 97% lower inference cost.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A test of Jev on reflection tests, one-shot matrix games, ALFWorld, and robot control that finds a sharp boundary: it succeeds when the right option can be judged from what the input describes, but fails when the right option depends on predicting something not in the input.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A conceptual article that formulates a conditional Jevons hypothesis for machine evaluation: sufficiently large reductions in the marginal cost of usable machine evaluation may increase its organizational consumption where latent demand is substantial and complementary costs do not dominate.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
4GitHub stars
An audit of whether Jev's confidence reflects missing knowledge rather than chance, using over 15 public datasets and 6 generated task families with paired interventions. Jev's confidence is calibrated on familiar closed-choice tasks but fails as an indicator of missing knowledge.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
A zero-shot evaluation of Jev (jev-1.13.0) on 37 datasets spanning classification, routing, NLI, reading comprehension, commonsense reasoning, moderation, legal clause analysis, and rubric scoring. It runs 346,009 requests for under USD 10 and reaches 95–99% accuracy on IMDB, SST-2, HellaSwag, and ARC.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
An audit of TypeSafe's JEV with the Values Survey Module 2013: 24 items asked as 12 matched Saudi and 12 matched American personas, without a persona, in English and Arabic, under eight request formulations, for 288,000 answers.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Introduces Sys1Cal-v1, a dataset of True/False questions about propositions whose exact probability is known by construction, queried through Jev's three primitives and scored by total variation from ground truth. Recovering a suppressed third value raises median soft accuracy from 0.771 to 0.978.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
0GitHub stars
Tests whether typed-decision model probabilities satisfy coherence, using logically linked questions that need no labels. On 480 negation pairs, Jev's probabilities for a label being X and not X miss summing to one by 0.064 on average.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
An audit of 28 papers posted between 19 and 24 September 2026, nine days after TypeSafe released Jev, relating their findings to earlier work and deriving a 14-item evaluation checklist. The typed readout shows no independent accuracy advantage yet; the clearest gains are latency and cost.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
1GitHub stars
KITE queries a typed behavioral kernel once per unique state, then runs populations of any size from the table, reserving an expensive flagship model for sparse paired anchors. On Epstein experiments with 9,070 participants, anchors covering 1.7% of states cut effect error by 41%.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
A comparison of Jev with 19 LLMs across 13 multiple-choice benchmarks covering knowledge, reasoning, and multilingual understanding. Jev is competitive with frontier LLMs on knowledge and commonsense tasks, but on MathQA it trails the frontier median by 17.7 points.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
An evaluation of Jev on two stance detection datasets, VAST for English texts and ZS-CSD for Chinese conversations, against four general-purpose LLMs and two fine-tuned models. Jev matches GPT-5.6 on VAST but falls behind stronger LLMs on ZS-CSD.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
2GitHub stars
An automated framework that traces adversarial context through Jev-backed program decisions to downstream effects. Across 228 real-world Jev applications and 2,273 test cases, 81.5% show decision flips, 98.6% with potential security impact, and Decision Flip Rate beats the strongest baseline by 50.4 points.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
xiaoxiaohg8d/JevProbe-Python
xiaoxiaohg8d/JevProbe-PythonA unified guardrail model that selects an applicable audit policy from a policy tree, then classifies safety conditioned on the retrieved policies. On 7,033 cases it reports 93.72% safety accuracy and 93.10% hierarchical routing accuracy at 58 ms mean latency.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A controlled adversarial comparison of Jev against five GPT and GLM judges and two local classifiers under identical payloads and policies. Jev is the most robust on input moderation and the fastest overall, but detects only 62% of phishing emails and flags the most benign requests.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
0GitHub stars
A systematic study of Jev's security and privacy implications using the official API and NanoJev, a local model with controllable training data. It adapts prompt injection, adversarial suffixes, and poisoned training data, runs inference attacks against typed outputs, and maps dual uses.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
shihe98/Security_Privacy_JevPython
shihe98/Security_Privacy_JevPythonSecJev is a family of security-specialized System One decision models from 0.8B to 9B parameters, built on Kev's single-pass candidate scorer. It spans 14 tasks and eight sources, and SecJev-0.8B beats general Kev-9B by 20.51 points in task-macro accuracy.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A pre-registered evaluation of Jev as a one-second, training-free screen for SCADA alarm triage in water distribution networks. On a four-class EPANET C-Town benchmark it matched a hand-written rule tree, and a gated cascade spared an LLM reviewer 35-38% of windows.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
JEV-IDS is an open experimental network intrusion detector that serializes one flow per request and asks Jev for a binary attack probability and a finite-choice traffic category. On a 300-flow NSL-KDD pilot it reports F1 0.859 and novel-attack recall 0.838.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
An empirical comparison of Jev as a typed judge for retrospective agent-trace security against four generative judges on 5,219 trajectories. Jev averages positive-class F1 77.8 versus 74.1 for GLM-5.2, leading on two of four benchmark collections.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
JevAdvBench is a black-box adversarial benchmark for RLCD models such as Jev, with 812 typed questions over 66 scenarios and 9,744 single-edit attack variants. On jev-1.13.0 an appended unverified opinion flipped 12.1% of decisions and pushed 38% of confident answers below the review threshold.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
RLCDAlignBench measures Jev as a zero-shot detector of ten alignment failures across 44 benchmarks and five target models. A single generic question reaches median AUROC 0.886 and beats supervised baselines on most benchmarks at 63 times lower cost than LLM judges.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
sumleo/RLCDAlignBenchPython
sumleo/RLCDAlignBenchPythonA position and case-study paper on using System One decision models like Jev and the open-source Laya as decision layers in LLM-driven penetration-testing harnesses. It names four decision points, runs an exploratory 13-vulnerability NeuroSploit comparison, and proposes Rave, an unevaluated model.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
An evaluation of prompt injection against Jev's typed probabilistic decisions using 510 reconstructed InjecAgent cases. Malicious content shifts action probabilities but rarely flips Jev to the attacker's target; score-feedback attacks raise fresh-run success from 1.8% to 3.5%.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
COGNIT-Guard is a safety guardrail that pairs a calibration-tuned CPU gatekeeper with confidence-gated escalation to an NPU-resident 322M direct-decision model, Laya-322M. It reports 98.85% accuracy and 0.42% benign false-positive rate on DUCS-Bench, with experience replay recovering out-of-distribution accuracy.
Jev Tools & CLIsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Introduces Jeva, a decision-native architecture that encodes the request and each option separately and scores options symmetrically. It targets null-awareness, permutation invariance, option scalability, and cacheability, reporting near-perfect null detection and no decision flips under tested permutations.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A dual-system architecture for autonomous research that couples fast evidence processing with deliberative planning: System Two sets evidence objectives, System One locates support. On fixed-corpus QA and document ranking it reports leading performance with lower cost than comparable agents.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Shows that open instruction-tuned models already read decisions from answer-letter logits without training, and that LoRA fine-tuning with a decision head lifts them past Jev: Gemma 4 31B goes from 79.6 to 84.4 on the new 2,352-question OpenDecisions set and scores 81.5 on JevBench v1.7.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Documents a failure mode in letter-bound remote sensing classification: 97.71% OA on UCM in vocabulary but 7.35%–96.40% cross-dataset accuracy and inverted confidence (AUROC 0.38). RSAJEV replaces the letter readout with training-free prototype retrieval, reaching 89.43% on the UCM cross-dataset gate.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A training-free method that studies redundancy in candidate evaluation for JEV-style multimodal decisions. Shared context anchoring, candidate prefix sharing, and decision-guided pruning cut candidate depth by 43.75%–45.83% while retaining 93.66%–97.52% of task scores.
Jev Practices & PatternsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
A working RLCD implementation for reasoning models: the model samples a rationale, and a strictly proper scoring rule grades the answer distribution it commits to afterward. With Qwen3-1.7B it matches or beats SFT, RFT/STaR, and GRPO in accuracy and beats all in selective prediction.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
ZimmyGao/openjev-rlcdPython
ZimmyGao/openjev-rlcdPythonA System One model for Chinese-language decisions trained on a 10-million-example corpus and fine-tuned for medicine, legal, and finance. Pre-training exceeds closed-source Jev by 1.24% on general tasks with a 20.3x speedup; domain fine-tuning beats Jev in medicine by 4.0%.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Presents PixelJev, a native-image decision interface that maps an image, a task instruction, and a runtime candidate set to a structured choice and candidate-conditioned probabilities. 64-shot source adaptation raises Pets accuracy from 60.13% to 92.40% across optimization seeds.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
9GitHub stars
A training-free algorithm that gets numerical output from any LLM with a Jev-like structured-choice interface by recursively refining a range through a multiway decision tree. Range-normalized MAE is 1.84% versus 5.18% for direct choice, and code is available on GitHub.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Bring-AI/jev-numericPython
Bring-AI/jev-numericPython45GitHub stars
Encodes an image and public context once, runs isolated question suffixes as a batch, and reads candidate probabilities from the backbone's language-model head. Answer-supervised post-training lifts equal-weight macro accuracy from 70.6% to 76.1% across four benchmarks.
Jev Models & ReimplementationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
guanxuyu-sv/Visual-JevPython
guanxuyu-sv/Visual-JevPythonTests one-pass scam-call screening on 41 held-out scenarios producing 577 per-turn decisions: a three-seed ensemble of LoRA-tuned Qwen3-4B reaches AUROC .974 with calibration error .052 and no false alarms on legitimate calls, at 64.5 ms per decision on one consumer GPU.
Jev Benchmarks & EvaluationsArticle#community#research#arxiv
Community
Start here with Jev
Hand-picked entries the maintainers recommend first, from official primitives to community tools.
Published evaluations of four automation workflows, security incidents, agent trace observability, invoice processing, and customer service, comparing Jev and frontier LLMs as structured workflows versus single prompts.
Jev Practices & PatternsDocs#official#benchmarks#evaluation
Official
6GitHub stars
.NET SDK for the System One API with typed question sets, HttpClientFactory and dependency-injection wiring, plus Microsoft.Extensions.AI guardrail, routing, tool, and evaluator adapters.
Jev Repos & SDKs#community#sdk#csharp
Community
Hawxy/TypeSafeAI.NetC#
Hawxy/TypeSafeAI.NetC#0GitHub stars
A NativeAOT-ready .NET SDK generated from TypeSafe's OpenAPI definition, with typed question sets, batching, dependency injection, and Microsoft.Extensions.AI integrations.
Jev Repos & SDKs#community#sdk#csharp
Community
tryAGI/TypeSafeAIC#
tryAGI/TypeSafeAIC#Newest Jev resources
The latest additions to the directory, newest first.
Watch: Jev in action
Walkthroughs, tests, and demos from the community.
YouTube: KodeKloud's three-minute primer: what a System One model decides, and why it answers in milliseconds.
YouTube: Caleb Writes Code explains what Jev is and how to call it, in seven minutes.
YouTube: Greg Isenberg and Ryan Vogel on the businesses Jev unlocks, and a path in through the Vercel AI Gateway.
YouTube: CJ from Syntax demos browser use, classification, code review, a model router, and a chat bot with no LLM.
YouTube: Ryan Vogel runs Jev on 100 and then 1,000 emails: category, priority, spam, and reply predictions.
YouTube: AICodeKing tests support routing, refund detection, prompt-injection resistance, and browser automation.
Discussions about Jev
Threads from Reddit and Hacker News about building with Jev.
Hacker News: Show HN: Ad Spend Guard gates budget before the auction, not the creative after.
Show HN: Gating ad budget with a decision modelRead the thread on Hacker NewsReddit: Reranking rebooking options with a decision model, ranked with reasons.
Hacker News: Pick Verify: a single decision at the warehouse pick station catches confusable picks.
Show HN: Verifying robot picks with a decision modelRead the thread on Hacker NewsHacker News: Decision Index 0.2.1 scores open reproductions of Jev on a frozen suite.
jackbravo4 pointsDecision Index 0.2.1 – 70 open reproductions of TypeSafe Jev's Decision ModelRead the thread on Hacker NewsHacker News: Software Bombe and live Enigma demo where Jev ranks cribs and judges plaintext.
ag_212 pointsShow HN: Jev as the Bletchley Park Analyst: A Software Bombe on EnigmaRead the thread on Hacker NewsHacker News: Show HN for the decide CLI: brew install, file context, and multi-question shell scripts.
vsekhar2 pointsShow HN: Decide – Jev decisions in the shell, scripts, and agent skillsRead the thread on Hacker NewsHow entries are chosen
Every entry is hand-picked against the same bar, whether it comes from TypeSafe or the community.
- Public and working — no paywalls, sign-up walls, or dead links.
- Concrete — it has to be about Jev and the System One API, not generic LLM content.
- Useful today — something a developer can learn from or use right now.
- Distinct — if a similar entry exists, the description has to say what makes this one different: a different runtime, a cheaper path, a measured result, or a narrower focus.
- Documented — repos state their license, and docs are in English or carry an English summary.
Spam, affiliate links, and thin AI-generated content are rejected. New entries are expected to ship with a deep dive: two to five highlights, caveats, a quickstart snippet where one helps, and a verification date. Star counts are refreshed when an entry is touched.
Common questions
Short answers about Jev and how this directory works.
What is Jev?
Jev is TypeSafe AI's first System One model. It takes a state plus typed questions and returns one structured answer per question — a choice, an ordered score, or the probability of yes — with calibrated confidence on Choice and Score answers, so code can branch on the result without parsing generated text.
What is the difference between Choice, Score, and Noul?
They are the three question primitives. Choice picks one of up to 255 options, Score rates on 2 to 10 ordered levels, and Noul answers yes or no. Choice and Score answers carry a confidence between 0 and 1; a Noul answer is the probability of yes.
Which Jev SDKs and client libraries are available?
TypeSafe maintains official JavaScript/TypeScript and Python SDKs plus a Python adapter. The community has built clients for Go, .NET, PHP, Laravel, Rust, Elixir, Ruby, and Scala, along with framework integrations such as DSPy, LlamaIndex, and Home Assistant. All of them are listed in the Repos & SDKs category.
Is the directory free, and is it affiliated with TypeSafe AI?
The directory is free to browse: every entry is hand-picked, and spam, affiliate links, and sign-up walls are rejected. JevDirectory.org is community-run and not affiliated with TypeSafe AI — Jev and System One are TypeSafe AI trademarks.
How often is the directory updated?
Entries are added as new resources appear and re-checked when they are touched. The directory currently holds 2441 entries from 148 source sites, last updated Oct 14, 2026.
What is a verified deep dive?
Most entries include a deep dive: two to five highlight bullets someone would only know from using the resource, a caveats note about limits and requirements, an optional quickstart snippet, and the date the link was last checked. 2441 of the 2441 entries carry one today.
For the canonical details, read the official TypeSafe docs and the API reference.
From the Jev community
Posts from builders shipping with Jev right now.