惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

博客园 - 叶小钗
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
G
Google Developers Blog
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
罗磊的独立博客
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
美团技术团队
爱范儿
爱范儿
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
H
Hackread – Cybersecurity News, Data Breaches, AI and More
D
DataBreaches.Net
F
Fortinet All Blogs
TaoSecurity Blog
TaoSecurity Blog
D
Docker
C
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency CISA
K
Kaspersky official blog
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
腾讯CDC
Google Online Security Blog
Google Online Security Blog
Recorded Future
Recorded Future
T
The Exploit Database - CXSecurity.com
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
V
V2EX
S
Securelist
K
KPMG report finds enterprise disconnect between AI and its ROI | CIO
C
CERT Recently Published Vulnerability Notes
A
Arctic Wolf
Scott Helme
Scott Helme
L
LINUX DO - 热门话题
Y
Y Combinator Blog
P
Proofpoint News Feed
T
Tor Project blog
AWS News Blog
AWS News Blog
cs.CV updates on arXiv.org
cs.CV updates on arXiv.org
The Last Watchdog
The Last Watchdog
博客园 - 聂微东
T
Threat Research - Cisco Blogs
B
Blog
Attack and Defense Labs
Attack and Defense Labs
L
Lohrmann on Cybersecurity
C
CXSECURITY Database RSS Feed - CXSecurity.com
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
IT之家
IT之家
N
News and Events Feed by Topic
博客园 - 司徒正美
H
Help Net Security
C
Cisco Blogs
C
Check Point Blog
S
Secure Thoughts

Interconnects AI

Latest open artifacts (#22): Zyphra, Cohere, and Poolside are expanding the breadth of the ecosystem GLM-5.2 is the step change for open agents Banning Open Source AI Would Be A Mistake State of the blog, mid-2026 Frontier post-training recipe review with Finbarr Timbers Welcome to the AGI era of AI governance Claude Fable 5 and new AI safety fables Farewell Ai2 Open and closed models are on different exponentials Some ideas for what comes next, May 2026 Latest open artifacts (#21): Open model bonanza! Gemma 4, DeepSeek V4, Kimi K2.6, MiMo 2.5, GLM-5.1 & others. On CAISI's V4 assessment. How open model ecosystems compound Notes from inside China's AI labs The distillation panic Reading today's open-closed performance gap My bets on open models, mid-2026 What I've been building: ATOM Report, post-training course, finishing my book, and research Claude Mythos and misguided open-weight fearmongering Gemma 4 and what makes an open model succeed
The inevitable need for an open model consortium
Nathan Lambert · 2026-04-11 · via Interconnects AI

Recently, I was talking with Percy Liang, Stanford professor and lead of the Marin project (another fully-open model lab), and it set in on me that there will eventually be a consortium of companies funding a foundational set of open models used across industry. It’s not clear when this’ll emerge, and Nemotron (Coalition) is Nvidia’s attempt to bankroll and bootstrap this approach within a single wealthy company, but a consortium is the only long-term stable path to well-funded, near-frontier open models.

In recent months, we’ve seen a lot of turnover in open model labs, with high-profile departures at Qwen and Ai2 (my comment). This shouldn’t be super surprising to followers of the ecosystem — it’s happened before with Meta shifting its focus away from Llama, and it’ll only happen more as the cost of trying to keep pace at the frontier of AI only increases. The other leading labs with models available today include Chinese startups such as Moonshot AI, MiniMax, and Z.ai — all of which look precarious on their ability to fund continued growth in the cost of training or R&D. Releasing one’s strongest models openly today is in active tension with the option of spending focus and resources on AI products that can currently generate meaningful revenue (and profits).

Share

We’re going to see business models emerge around releasing some, or even many, models openly, but these will largely be smaller models that enable a long-tail of functionality, rather than models at the absolute frontier. This class of companies that’ll release many, strong fine-tunable models will include the likes of Arcee AI, Thinking Machines, OpenAI, Google with Gemma, and more in that class. The cost and relative advantage of keeping the best models closed in a business environment with many opportunities for revenue are too high. To summarize — there will be an ever increasing number of companies releasing models that are good for creating a lively niche of smaller, custom models, but an ever decreasing number of companies willing to release fully open, near-frontier models.

This is the core thesis of why I’m pushing hard for more people to do more research on how these smaller models can complement the best closed agents, the science of finetunability, etc. See my post below — it’s about creating a sustainable open model ecosystem, whether or not the frontier of open keeps paced with closed:

What comes next with open models

It’ll take years for this equilibrium to become more obvious, seen through the lens of more open model families coming and going. This year, it seems likely we’ll see Nvidia’s Nemotron reach new heights, Reflection AI challenge some of the Chinese models with a strong, large MoE, maybe Meta releases a new open-weight model, and so on. True pressure to change strategy will only come when the capital environment punishes the less efficient spend on resources (e.g. giving away your competitive advantage, in having an in-house model). This pressure will likely hit Chinese startups training these models first.

All of Moonshot AI, MiniMax, and Zhipu AI will show signs of financial challenge in the coming years if they retain their strategy, on top of their models falling further behind the best open models in terms of generality. This is inevitable pressure to evolve open models to areas that are profitable and complementary of the frontier of AI.

Nvidia, which is best positioned to support the open ecosystem in the near term to support its core GPU business, could face many pressures to pull back its open model efforts. It could:

  • Realize it’s too competitive to their biggest customers as they succeed too much with Nemotron,

  • Fall to competition on their core business and lose the free cash flow buffer needed to fund this (e.g. it’s 2031 and OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and the other frontier labs are worth so much they build their own chips).1

  • Start succeeding beyond their initial goals and keep the chips for them to build ASI themselves, as a closed-weight model.

The pressures for new funding mechanisms for open models are based on the assumptions of continued, substantive progress on the capabilities of frontier models. Mechanisms such as self-improvement and scaling all stages of the training pipeline are underway. This progress of capabilities will only increase the potential profit in selling models as and in products, not giving them away. The scale of investment required has already begun to push away non-profits from the game of making truly frontier-scale models.2 Capitalism is designed to make companies ruthless and chase down leads on profitability, not donate technology as charity.

As the economic environment shifts companies away from releasing the strongest models openly, more companies that rely on these models will look for an outlet of securing model access into the future. This is going to be compounded by a growing group of companies who come to rely on open-weight models for their workflows.

These points loop back into how model training is getting more expensive, so where desire to have the models will go up, ability to procure them will go down for many players. There are x-factors that could multiply the demand for institutions to ensure the existence of open models, such as the best frontier models not even being available via API (such as if Claude Mythos never goes general access).

As training relevant models is shifting to cost billions of dollars, rather than millions, few companies well be able to afford it. many companies will bite at the cost of paying 1/10th of the cost to train a frontier model, or if the consortium works, 1/50th. The upside for companies will be some mechanism to steer development (e.g. model sizes) or getting early access to develop internal and open-source tooling for the model.

It is in my nature to, by default, say this idea will fail, as training models is inherently a complex and high-focus endeavor, one that requires integration of every part of the stack and focusing specifically on your own vision and needs, rather than trying to serve every possible user. Eventually the need for open intelligence — and economic pressure to build it — will make a model consortium inevitable.