质疑 Jev「零幻觉」：类型保证来自模型还是采样层
开发者讨论 Jev 与 Outlines/llguidance 的区别，追问类型安全是模型内在还是推理层约束，并呼吁公开技术细节。
Yeah, I think that is a valid point. if 0% hallucination means "0% schema violations", then calling that zero hallucination is pretty misleading. Where I'd separate Jev from Outlines/llguidance is that Jev isn't generating text and then constraining the decoder. The difference here is that Jev's claimed primitive is a typed probabilistic decision, rather than generated text. So I don't think the interesting question is whether it can produce invalid schema (we already know how to guarantee schema-conformant outputs from autoregressive LLMs with constrained decoding) From where I'm standing the more interesting question is from where Jev's guarantee actually comes from: is the typed output space intrinsic to the model/output architecture, or enforced by its sampler/inference layer? And beyond type safety, the bigger claim to test is RLCD itself: does Jev produce meaningfully better calibrated semantic decisions than a comparable LLM using constrained decoding and explicit calibration? I would love they publish technical details so we can actually see what is novel at the model level