| 0 |
| Quality | 0 | 0 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Paid |
| Starting Price | $4.80e-7 per prompt token | $6.00e-7 per prompt token |
| Capabilities | 8 decomposed | 11 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Classifies incoming user prompts against a taxonomy of 6 content safety categories (violence, illegal activity, self-harm, sexual content, harassment, and specialized harms) using a fine-tuned Llama 3.1 8B backbone. The model outputs structured safety labels with confidence scores, enabling real-time filtering of unsafe requests before they reach downstream LLMs. Uses instruction-following patterns from Llama 3.1 training combined with safety-specific fine-tuning to distinguish between discussing harmful topics (safe) and requesting harmful actions (unsafe).
Unique: Purpose-built safety classifier based on Llama 3.1 8B (not a general-purpose LLM repurposed for safety) with fine-tuning specifically on safety classification tasks, enabling better calibration of confidence scores and category-specific accuracy compared to using general LLMs with safety prompts
vs alternatives: Smaller and faster than OpenAI Moderation API (8B vs 175B+) while maintaining comparable accuracy on standard safety categories, and can run locally without API latency or cost-per-request fees
Classifies LLM-generated outputs (responses, completions, assistant messages) against the same 6-category safety taxonomy to detect when downstream models produce unsafe content. Operates on the same fine-tuned Llama 3.1 8B architecture but is applied post-generation to catch safety failures in model outputs. Enables real-time detection of jailbreak successes, hallucinated harmful instructions, or unintended unsafe content generation.
Unique: Designed specifically for post-generation classification with fine-tuning that handles longer, more complex outputs compared to prompt-only classifiers, and includes patterns for detecting subtle unsafe content in natural language responses rather than just explicit requests
vs alternatives: Provides symmetric safety coverage (both input and output) using a single model architecture, reducing operational complexity compared to running separate prompt and response classifiers from different vendors
Returns safety classifications as structured JSON with per-category confidence scores (typically 0.0-1.0 range) rather than binary pass/fail verdicts, enabling fine-grained safety policy decisions. The model outputs logits or probability distributions across the 6 safety categories, allowing applications to set custom thresholds per category (e.g., stricter on violence, more lenient on political content). Implements a multi-label classification approach where content can be flagged in multiple categories simultaneously.
Unique: Exposes per-category confidence scores from the fine-tuned Llama 3.1 8B model rather than aggregating to a single safety verdict, enabling category-specific policy enforcement and detailed safety telemetry that most general-purpose safety APIs abstract away
vs alternatives: Provides more granular control than binary safety APIs (OpenAI Moderation) while remaining simpler than building custom classifiers, allowing teams to implement domain-specific safety policies without retraining models
Classifies content against specialized harm categories beyond standard content policy violations, including CSAM-related content, illegal activities, self-harm, and harassment. The fine-tuning incorporates patterns for detecting nuanced harms (e.g., grooming language, suicide encouragement) that may not be caught by keyword-based or simple pattern-matching approaches. Uses instruction-following capabilities of Llama 3.1 to understand context and intent rather than relying on surface-level text matching.
Unique: Fine-tuned specifically on specialized harm patterns (CSAM, illegal activity, self-harm, harassment) rather than general content policy violations, enabling detection of context-dependent and sophisticated harms that require semantic understanding rather than keyword matching
vs alternatives: Detects nuanced specialized harms using semantic understanding (context, intent, metaphor) compared to keyword-based or regex-based systems, while remaining faster and cheaper than human review or multi-model ensemble approaches
Supports batch processing of multiple prompts or responses through OpenRouter's API, enabling efficient classification of large volumes of content without per-request overhead. Integrates with OpenRouter's batch API infrastructure to queue, process, and retrieve safety classifications asynchronously, reducing per-request latency and cost for high-volume moderation pipelines. Handles rate limiting, retries, and result aggregation transparently.
Unique: Integrates with OpenRouter's batch API infrastructure to provide asynchronous, cost-optimized safety classification without requiring local model deployment or managing inference infrastructure, while maintaining the same safety accuracy as synchronous API calls
vs alternatives: Reduces per-request cost and API overhead compared to synchronous classification for high-volume use cases, while remaining simpler than self-hosting the model or building custom batch processing infrastructure
Classifies safety across multiple languages using the same fine-tuned Llama 3.1 8B model, leveraging the base model's multilingual capabilities. However, safety fine-tuning is primarily optimized for English, with varying accuracy across other languages depending on training data representation. The model uses cross-lingual transfer learning to extend English safety patterns to other languages, but performance degrades gracefully for low-resource languages or non-Latin scripts.
Unique: Leverages Llama 3.1's multilingual base model to extend English-optimized safety fine-tuning across 8+ languages through cross-lingual transfer, enabling single-model deployment for global moderation without language-specific retraining
vs alternatives: Simpler operational model than deploying separate language-specific safety classifiers, though with accuracy tradeoffs for non-English languages compared to language-specific fine-tuned models
Integrates with LLM frameworks (LangChain, LlamaIndex, Anthropic SDK, OpenAI SDK) and safety middleware systems through standardized API interfaces. Can be deployed as a prompt guard (pre-LLM) or response filter (post-LLM) in application chains, with built-in support for async/await patterns, error handling, and fallback logic. Supports integration with observability platforms for logging, monitoring, and alerting on safety violations.
Unique: Designed for integration into LLM application frameworks through standard API patterns (async/await, callbacks, middleware hooks) rather than as a standalone service, enabling seamless safety classification within existing application architectures
vs alternatives: Integrates more naturally into LLM application frameworks compared to external safety APIs that require custom orchestration, reducing boilerplate code and enabling framework-native error handling and observability
Provides safety classifications that can be composed with custom policy rules and business logic to implement application-specific safety policies. The model outputs structured category scores that applications can combine with custom rules (e.g., 'block if violence_score > 0.7 AND user_is_minor', 'warn if harassment_score > 0.5 AND user_is_verified'). Enables policy-as-code approaches where safety decisions are driven by composable rules rather than hard-coded thresholds.
Unique: Outputs structured category scores designed for composition with custom policy rules and business logic, enabling application-specific safety policies without model retraining or hard-coded thresholds
vs alternatives: More flexible than fixed-policy safety APIs (OpenAI Moderation) while remaining simpler than building custom classifiers, enabling teams to implement domain-specific and user-segment-specific safety policies through rule composition
GLM-4.5 uses a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture to dynamically route tokens through specialized expert networks based on input characteristics, enabling efficient processing of 128k-token contexts without proportional latency increases. The MoE design allows selective expert activation per token, reducing computational overhead while maintaining reasoning depth across extended conversations and multi-document analysis tasks typical of agent-based workflows.
Unique: Mixture-of-Experts routing specifically tuned for agent workloads rather than generic dense models; expert activation patterns are optimized for tool-use sequences and multi-step reasoning rather than general language tasks
vs alternatives: Outperforms dense models like GPT-4 Turbo on agent tasks within 128k context by routing computational budget to relevant experts, reducing latency and cost vs. models that process all tokens through identical layers
GLM-4.5 implements native function calling through a schema-based registry where tools are defined as JSON schemas with parameter constraints, type validation, and description metadata. The model learns to emit structured tool invocations that map directly to function signatures, enabling deterministic tool orchestration without post-processing or regex parsing. Integration with OpenRouter's API exposes this via standard function-calling parameters compatible with OpenAI's format.
Unique: Schema-based function calling is trained directly into the model weights rather than implemented as post-hoc decoding constraints, allowing the model to learn semantic relationships between tool purposes and input context during training
vs alternatives: More reliable than constraint-based function calling (e.g., Guidance, LMQL) because tool selection is learned rather than enforced, reducing parsing failures and enabling the model to reason about tool applicability
Z.ai: GLM 4.5 scores higher at 24/100 vs Llama Guard 3 8B at 23/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
GLM-4.5 can be used for batch inference through OpenRouter's API, enabling cost-optimized processing of large numbers of requests. Batch processing typically offers reduced pricing compared to real-time API calls and is suitable for non-urgent inference tasks. The model can process batches of prompts efficiently, with results returned after processing completes. This is valuable for agents running scheduled tasks or processing large datasets.
Unique: Batch processing is offered through OpenRouter's unified API rather than a separate batch service, enabling seamless switching between real-time and batch modes with the same client code
vs alternatives: More cost-effective than real-time API for high-volume inference; simpler than managing separate batch infrastructure because OpenRouter handles queuing and result delivery
GLM-4.5 maintains coherent conversation state across turns by encoding prior messages into a compressed representation that persists within the 128k context window. The model uses attention mechanisms to selectively retrieve relevant prior context, enabling agents to reference earlier decisions, tool results, and user preferences without explicit memory management. This is particularly effective for agent workflows where state accumulation (e.g., task progress, discovered facts) must inform subsequent actions.
Unique: Implicit memory management through attention-based context selection rather than explicit memory modules; the model learns which prior turns are relevant without separate retrieval or summarization steps
vs alternatives: More efficient than explicit memory systems (e.g., LangChain's ConversationBufferMemory) because attention is computed once during inference rather than requiring separate retrieval and summarization passes
GLM-4.5 generates code across 40+ programming languages by leveraging training data that includes diverse codebases and syntax patterns. The model understands language-specific idioms, library conventions, and structural patterns (e.g., async/await in JavaScript, type hints in Python, generics in Java) without explicit language-specific modules. Generation is context-aware, respecting indentation, existing code style, and project conventions when completing or extending code snippets.
Unique: Language-agnostic code generation trained on diverse codebases rather than language-specific fine-tuning; the model generalizes syntax patterns across languages, enabling reasonable code generation even for less common languages
vs alternatives: Broader language coverage than specialized models like Codex (which emphasizes Python/JavaScript) but lower quality on niche languages compared to language-specific models; better for polyglot teams than single-language specialists
GLM-4.5 is trained on extensive technical documentation, API references, and code examples, enabling it to understand and reason about complex technical concepts, library APIs, and system architectures. The model can parse API schemas (OpenAPI, GraphQL, Protocol Buffers), understand parameter constraints and type systems, and generate code that correctly uses APIs based on documentation. This is particularly valuable for agent workflows that must interact with external systems.
Unique: Semantic understanding of API schemas and documentation is learned from training data rather than implemented as a separate schema parser; the model reasons about API semantics holistically
vs alternatives: More flexible than code-generation-only models because it understands API semantics and can reason about correctness; better than generic LLMs for technical tasks because training includes extensive API documentation
GLM-4.5 can generate responses that explicitly show reasoning steps, enabling transparency into how conclusions were reached. When prompted with chain-of-thought patterns, the model generates intermediate reasoning steps before final answers, making it suitable for applications requiring explainability or verification. This is implemented through training on reasoning-annotated data and prompt patterns that encourage step-by-step decomposition.
Unique: Chain-of-thought reasoning is trained directly into the model rather than implemented as a decoding strategy; the model learns to generate reasoning steps as part of its core training objective
vs alternatives: More natural and coherent reasoning steps than prompt-injection approaches (e.g., appending 'think step by step') because reasoning is learned as a first-class capability
GLM-4.5 supports multiple languages (Chinese, English, and others) with training that enables cross-lingual reasoning — understanding concepts expressed in one language and reasoning about them in another. The model can translate, summarize, and reason across languages without language-specific degradation. This is particularly valuable for global applications and agents that must operate in multilingual environments.
Unique: Cross-lingual reasoning is learned from multilingual training data rather than implemented as separate language-specific models; the model develops a shared representation across languages
vs alternatives: More efficient than maintaining separate models per language because a single model handles all languages; better for cross-lingual reasoning than language-specific models because the shared representation enables concept transfer
+3 more capabilities