kel-dx/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct-NVFP4

llm-jp-4-8b-instruct — NVFP4 (Japanese-calibrated)

NVFP4 quantization of llm-jp/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct for native serving on NVIDIA Blackwell GPUs with vLLM: RTX PRO 6000 (SM120) and DGX Spark / GB10 (SM121). It is 8.9 GB (0.52× of BF16), recovers ~99.1% of the BF16 quality score, and improves single-stream decode by 1.76× on RTX PRO 6000 and 2.02× on DGX Spark / GB10 in the llama-benchy measurements below.

The calibration set is a Japanese-heavy chat/instruction mix matched to the model's expected deployment distribution. The full recipe, calibration datasheet, and every evaluation number (including the unflattering ones) are published here.

Quickstart

pip install "vllm~=0.24.0" ./vllm_plugin
vllm serve <this-repo> --trust-remote-code --reasoning-parser llmjp4

Then use any OpenAI-compatible client against /v1/chat/completions — the bundled plugin registers the Harmony reasoning parser and sets the required detokenization defaults, so no special request fields are needed.

Quantization recipe

• —Tool: NVIDIA Model Optimizer (nvidia-modelopt==0.45.0), modelopt-format export → vLLM's native fast path (FlashInferCutlassNvFp4LinearKernel)
• —Scale integrity: all FP8-E4M3 weight_scale tensors are byte-scanned for NaN encodings (0x7F/0xFF) as a standard post-export gate — zero present (quantization_recipe/scan_weight_scale_nan.py).
• —Mixed precision (following NVIDIA's own NVFP4 model releases):
• —MLP linears (gate/up/down): NVFP4 (FP4 block-16, FP8 block scales)
• —Attention projections (q/k/v/o): FP8 (E4M3 per-tensor)
• —First 2 and last 2 decoder layers, embeddings, lm_head, norms: BF16 (Nemotron-style exclusion of the most quantization-sensitive layers)
• —Calibration: 588 samples (~1.5M tokens):
• —512 conversations (40% JA multi-turn chat, 20% JA knowledge, 15% JA math, 10% JA-instructed code, 15% EN chat), passed through the model's Harmony chat template so activation ranges see deployment-realistic token streams.
• —76 strict-format samples in raw completion form (no chat template): <answer>-tagged NLI (content from JNLI train — no eval-set overlap) and short-answer QA, plus JSON-schema outputs. Constrained-output formats (tags, JSON, fixed labels) are served as raw zero-shot prompts by many benchmark harnesses and applications, so they are calibrated in that form too; the slice deliberately uses the same zero-shot instruction scaffold conventions as Japanese evaluation harnesses (llm-jp-eval style), with content drawn only from training splits. Datasheet and the exact calibration file: quantization_recipe/.
• —Base model revision 098f2b2cf33021eba19a6d3582aa3d071ccc0aff; environment freeze in quantization_recipe/environment_freeze.txt.
• —Exact reproduction (base revision and calibration file default to the pinned/bundled ones):

  pip install "nvidia-modelopt[all]==0.45.0" "transformers==5.5.4" "accelerate==1.14.0"
  python quantization_recipe/03_ptq_modelopt.py --export-dir ./nvfp4-export
  python quantization_recipe/04_export_and_patch.py --export-dir ./nvfp4-export

Evaluation (all measured through served vLLM kernels, not simulation)

Both columns measured on the same harness, same settings, same machine, same serving stack (RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, vLLM 0.24.0). llm-jp-eval v2.1.5, 100 samples/dataset, temperature 0, 58 datasets + xlsum supplement.

Category detail (JA, this checkpoint vs BF16): NLI 0.800/0.810, QA 0.479/0.506, RC 0.710/0.710, CR 0.870/0.867, HE 0.383/0.385, EL 0.600/0.614, FA 0.314/0.326, MR 0.341/0.368, MT 0.842/0.842, IF 0.490/0.450, BBH 0.605/0.585, LM 0.780/0.800; EN AVG 0.444/0.454.

Math is evaluated on full test sets with paired per-item flip analysis (McNemar-style) because n=100 binomial noise cannot resolve ~1% relative changes; "n.s." = not statistically significant.

MT-Bench note: judged with a fixed local judge (Gemma-4-31B-IT-NVFP4, greedy), all rounds of both models in one batch session, generation max_tokens=2048. Round-to-round generation spread is ±0.04–0.12. Scores are relative comparisons only — not comparable to LLM-jp's published GPT-judge numbers.

Throughput: BF16 vs NVFP4

Measured with llama-benchy, vLLM 0.24.0, 2,048 prompt tokens, 256 generated tokens, and three measured runs.

On RTX PRO 6000, c=1 decode is stable to <0.1% across runs; the c=4–16 points carry ±10–15% run-to-run spread. KV-cache capacity at --gpu-memory-utilization 0.9 grows ~15% thanks to the smaller weights. The DGX Spark / GB10 rows were measured locally on 2026-07-26 against BF16 llm-jp/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct revision 098f2b2cf33021eba19a6d3582aa3d071ccc0aff and this NVFP4 checkpoint revision 748431048bb5b7114424ae6c0a17bdd2172cc9cf.

Compatible DFlash Drafter

A companion DFlash drafter is available at `kel-jp/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct-NVFP4-speculator.dflash`.

It is not a standalone text-generation model. Use it as a draft/speculator model while serving this NVFP4 model as the verifier in stock vLLM:

vllm serve kel-jp/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct-NVFP4 \
  --trust-remote-code \
  --reasoning-parser llmjp4 \
  --speculative-config '{"method":"dflash","model":"kel-jp/llm-jp-4-8b-instruct-NVFP4-speculator.dflash","num_speculative_tokens":3}'

On DGX Spark / GB10 (SM121), a Japanese ELYZA-100 streaming decode benchmark measured 14.42 tok/s for BF16, 29.73 tok/s for this NVFP4 checkpoint, and 49.04 tok/s for NVFP4 + DFlash. That is a 3.40× mean decode throughput increase from BF16 to NVFP4 + DFlash, with DFlash adding 1.64× over the NVFP4 verifier baseline in the paired run.

Serving notes

Requires vLLM ≥ 0.24 (modelopt mixed-precision NVFP4 is mainline in stable ≥ 0.24; the load path selects quantization=modelopt_mixed with FlashInferCutlassNvFp4LinearKernel). vLLM 0.24.0 is the recommended and benchmark-validated version. 0.25.0 loads and scores identically in our testing (same kernels, +2% decode), but we observed one unreproduced cudaErrorIllegalAddress engine crash under high-concurrency load on it and haven't cleared it for production yet. Validated end-to-end on SM120 (RTX PRO 6000) and SM121 (DGX Spark / GB10).

The base model emits its responses in OpenAI-Harmony structure (<|channel|>analysis/final<|message|>…), which is why the bundled plugin is needed: it registers the llmjp4 reasoning parser (splitting reasoning from content), and when that parser is selected it defaults skip_special_tokens to false on chat completions so the Harmony structure survives detokenization. An explicit request value always wins, and other models/parsers on a server with the plugin installed are unaffected. For setups where the plugin cannot be installed server-side, a transparent proxy with the same effect is included (UPSTREAM_BASE_URL=http://localhost:8000 PROXY_PORT=8080 python3 vllm_plugin/harmony_proxy.py).

The plugin's parser also handles a SentencePiece boundary-space artifact in vLLM's incremental detokenizer that otherwise breaks non-streaming channel extraction.

Known limitations (measured, not hypothetical)

• —Small math regression: paired per-item analysis on the full gsm8k test set shows a net −16/1319 items vs BF16 (z=1.6, not statistically significant). mgsm and mawps show no significant change.
• —QA softness: JA QA category 94.6% of BF16, EN QA ~91% (drop/mmlu-style extractive QA; n=100/dataset).
• —Base-model quirk (not quantization-related): the model may identify itself as "ChatGPT" when asked who it is.

License & attribution

Apache-2.0, same as the base model. Base model by LLM-jp. Calibration data: llm-jp/oasst2-33k-ja (Apache-2.0), wikimedia/wikipedia 20231101.ja (CC-BY-SA-4.0), Kendamarron/magpie-japanese-math-instruction-17k-qwen2.5-bakeneko-32b-instruct (Apache-2.0), ronantakizawa/python-code-instructions-japanese (MIT), HuggingFaceH4/ultrachat200k (MIT), JGLUE/JNLI train split via zenless-lab/jnli (CC-BY-SA-4.0). The CC-BY-NC xlsumja dataset was used ONLY for evaluation scoring, never for calibration.

Original model card: llm-jp-4-8b-instruct

llm-jp-4-8b-instruct

LLM-jp-4 is a series of large language models developed by the Research and Development Center for Large Language Models at the National Institute of Informatics.

This repository provides the llm-jp-4-8b-instruct For an overview of the LLM-jp-4 models across different parameter sizes, please refer to:

• —LLM-jp-4 Models

Base models are trained with pre-training and mid-training only. Post-trained models are aligned using supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and direct preference optimization (DPO), without reinforcement learning.

[!NOTE] While the thinking variants are trained with both SFT and DPO, this instruct model is trained using SFT only, without DPO.

For practical usage examples and detailed instructions on how to use the models, please also refer to our cookbook.

To support the continued development of LLM-jp, we would greatly appreciate it if you could share how you utilize LLM-jp outcomes via the survey form.

Usage

Please refer to our cookbook for practical usage examples and detailed instructions on how to use the models.

Model Details

• —Model type: Transformer-based Language Model
• —Architectures:

Dense model: |Params|Layers|Hidden size|Heads|Context length|Embedding parameters|Non-embedding parameters|Total parameters| |:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| |8B|32|4,096|32|65,536|805,306,368|7,784,894,464|8,590,200,832|

MoE model: |Params|Layers|Hidden size|Heads|Routed Experts|Activated Experts|Context length|Embedding parameters|Non-embedding parameters|Activated parameters|Total parameters| |:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:| |32B-A3B|32|2,560|40|128|8|65,536|503,316,480|31,635,712,512|3,827,476,992|32,139,028,992|

Tokenizer

The tokenizer of this model is based on huggingface/tokenizers Unigram byte-fallback model. The vocabulary entries were converted from `llm-jp-tokenizer v4.0`. Please refer to README.md of llm-jp-tokenizer for details on the vocabulary construction procedure (the pure SentencePiece training does not reproduce our vocabulary).

[!NOTE] The chat template of this model is designed to be compatible with the OpenAI Harmony response format. However, the tokenizer differs from the one assumed by the openai-harmony library, and therefore direct tokenization with openai-harmony is not supported. For correct behavior, please use the tokenizer provided with this model. For detailed usage, please refer to our cookbook.

Training

Pre-training

This model is trained through a multi-stage pipeline consisting of pre-training and mid-training phases, using a total of 11.7T tokens.

The corpora used for pre-training and mid-training are publicly available at the following links:

• —Pre-training
• —Mid-training

[!NOTE] Although most of the corpora have been released, some portions are excluded from public release due to licensing constraints.

Post-training

We have fine-tuned the pre-trained checkpoint using SFT and further aligned it with DPO.

The datasets used for post-training are also publicly available at the following links:

• —SFT
• —DPO (for llm-jp-4-8b-thinking model)
• —DPO (for llm-jp-4-32b-a3b-thinking model)

Evaluation

llm-jp-judge

We evaluated the model on a variety of tasks using an LLM-as-a-Judge framework. The descriptions of each task are as follows.

• —MT-Bench (JA/EN): A benchmark for measuring multi-turn conversational task-solving ability.
• —AnswerCarefully: A benchmark for evaluating safety in Japanese. We used 336 questions from the v2.0 test set.
• —llm-jp-instructions: A set of human-created single-turn question–answer pairs. We used 400 questions from the test set.

We evaluated the models using gpt-5.4-2026-03-05.

[!NOTE] Note: In earlier evaluations of the llm-jp-3 series, we used gpt-4o-2024-08-06. The newer evaluator gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 provides a stricter and more reliable assessment, which results in lower scores on benchmarks such as MT-Bench compared to those reported for the llm-jp-3 series.

The scores represent the average values obtained from three rounds of inference and evaluation. For more details, please refer to the codes.

Risks and Limitations

The models released here are in the early stages of our research and development and have not been tuned to ensure outputs align with human intent and safety considerations.

Send Questions to

llm-jp(at)nii.ac.jp

License

Apache License, Version 2.0

Acknowledgement

To develop this model, we used the NINJAL Web Japanese Corpus (whole-NWJC) from the National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics (NINJAL).

Model Card Authors

The names are listed in alphabetical order.

Hirokazu Kiyomaru and Takashi Kodama.