Sign in

Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Kolibri-1

EXAONE 4.5 33B and Kolibri-1 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Kolibri-1 leads on risk, agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

EXAONE 4.5 33BLG AI Research · Open-weight model C61/100#61 of 160 open-weight models Kolibri-1Aleph Alpha · Open-weight model C61/100#44 of 160 open-weight models

Which one, for what

EXAONE 4.5 33B C

Best for Researchers and students working on documents, Korean or multimodal agents who don't need commercial rights

No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.

Watch for

Research and education only. No commercial use of the model or its output

Kolibri-1 C

Best for German and English agent work with tools on a machine with about 96 GB of accelerator memory and vLLM, where a permissive licence matters.

Ahead on

  • Risk, 65 against 50
  • Agent interface, 90 against 85
  • Documentation and upkeep, 70 against 50

Watch for

The smallest publisher build is FP8 at 78.8 GB, so it needs about 95 GB and won't fit a 64 GB machine

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Documentation and upkeep Kolibri-1 +20

EXAONE 4.5 33B 50

Model card 20, Uses (the quickstart's question answering, document and agent examples), limitations, the architecture, the parameters, the context, the languages (in the metadata) and a knowledge cut-off of December 2024 are all on the card. Training data 5, A knowledge cut-off and one line on excluding personal, harmful and biased content, with no sources or sizes. Last change 10, the main repository last changed on 6 July 2026 (dependencies moved to official releases), 127 days before this check, and the FP8 repository on 9 August, 93 days. Responsiveness 0, none of the 5 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (13 April to 4 May 2026) has a reply from an LGAI-EXAONE member, counted on 10 November by author flags and dates with a script, text not read. Version policy 5, EXAONE 4.0 and 4.0.1 stay in their own repositories and 4.5 came out in new ones, with no dated note on the older cards that we read. File health 10, Config, template and card agree on the architecture and the 262,144 tokens, and a July commit moved the dependencies to released versions. 20 + 5 + 10 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 50.

Kolibri-1 70

The model card earns 20 with all seven items. Training data earns 15 for a data card with the mix, the filtering and the cut-off, short of a dataset list with sizes. The last change earns 20, for template and card commits on 20 October 2026. Responsiveness earns 5, since Aleph Alpha replied in 2 of 14 discussions across both repositories and none since 13 October. Version policy earns 5 for a first release. File health earns 5, because the files agree but a report of a broken tool-call parser in the publisher's container image has waited since 7 October without a reply.

Risk Kolibri-1 +15

EXAONE 4.5 33B 50

File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, the files sit in the LGAI-EXAONE organisation (LG AI Research on the Hub), which the card's GitHub repository shares a name with and the licence in the repository is LG's (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 5, General cautions: the limitation section lists inappropriate, biased, incorrect and outdated answers and tells users not to try to induce harmful output. Licence risk 5, 15 less 5 for field-of-use limits beyond the law (no commercial use, no building competing models) and 5 for terms the licensor can change or revoke (LG may amend the agreement at any time, and the licence is revocable). Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw on the card beyond a support contact, and www.lgresearch.ai has no security.txt. 25 + 15 + 0 + 5 + 5 + 0 = 50.

Kolibri-1 65

File safety earns 25 for safetensors only, with no repository code run on load. Provenance earns 15, for the Aleph-Alpha organisation the launch post links and a SHA-256 for every weight shard. Safety evaluation earns 0, because the card says refusals were measured and neither the card nor the technical report publishes results. Agent guidance earns 10, since the card says what the trained refusals cover and which safeguards to add around the model, without prompt-injection guidance. Licence risk earns the full 15 under unchanged Apache 2.0. The security programme earns 0, as no contact, policy or advisories were found and security.txt answered 403 on 3 November, so it is scored as absent and left open.

Agent interface Kolibri-1 +5

EXAONE 4.5 33B 85

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (5,930 characters). Tool-calling format 25, the card's vLLM command names the parser, hermes with auto tool choice, and its agentic example calls tools from MCP servers through the OpenAI-compatible API, so declaration and return follow that API. Trained tool calling 20, the card reports agentic tool use among its language results and shows an agent run with several tool servers, and the template renders every call in a turn. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained output. Reasoning control 10, enable_thinking is on by default and the card says to set it false for the non-reasoning mode, with an example of each. Context 10, 262,144 tokens per the card's configuration table and config.json, and the card's serve commands run at that length. 20 + 25 + 20 + 0 + 10 + 10 = 85.

Kolibri-1 90

The chat template earns 20 as Jinja in tokenizer_config.json. The tool-calling format earns 25, because the card documents how tools are declared and how calls come back and names the kolibri1 parser for vLLM with a full example. Trained tool calling earns 20, from training on tool environments and a template built for several calls in one turn. Structured output earns 5, since the card claims it without saying how to ask. Reasoning control earns 10 for effort levels and an off switch per request, with the reasoning returned in a separate field. Context earns 10 for 262,144 tokens trained.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runEXAONE 4.5 33BKolibri-1Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%256565even
Risk20%205065Kolibri-1 +15
Agent interface10%108590Kolibri-1 +5
Documentation and upkeep10%105070Kolibri-1 +20
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 61/100

Facts side by side

FactEXAONE 4.5 33BKolibri-1
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorLG AI ResearchAleph Alpha
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceEXAONE AI Model License Agreement 1.2 - NC (research and education only)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-062026-10-19
Terms last updatednot read yetno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone3.3/5 (4)

How the scores have moved

EXAONE 4.5 33B

No score change since it was listed.

Kolibri-1

Verdicts

EXAONE 4.5 33B

A well-documented vision-language model with a full set of builds, tool calling, switchable reasoning, a 256K context and a stated knowledge cut-off. The licence decides whether you can use it: research and education only, output included, and LG can change the terms. Nothing answered on the repository and no safety results.

Kolibri-1

Kolibri-1 is a German and English reasoning model with a documented tool-call format, switchable thinking and a 262,144-token context, under Apache 2.0. Aleph Alpha's FP8 build needs about 95 GB and runs on vLLM and Transformers 5.20; llama.cpp and Ollama 0.40.14 need a GGUF. The main risk is no published safety results or security contact, and few repository answers.

Before you call either

EXAONE 4.5 33B

  1. Don't use it, or anything it writes, commercially. The licence covers the output too
  2. Serve it with vLLM and --reasoning-parser qwen3 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser hermes
  3. Set enable_thinking false for a direct answer. Thinking is on by default
  4. Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and presence_penalty 1.5 in general, and temperature 0.6 with top_k 20 for documents and Korean
  5. For llama.cpp, load a projector file from LG's GGUF repository with the weights for image input
  6. Its knowledge stops at December 2024

Kolibri-1

  1. Start it with pip install 'aleph-alpha-inference>=1' then vllm serve Aleph-Alpha/Kolibri-1 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --reasoning-parser kolibri1 --tool-call-parser kolibri1 --enable-auto-tool-choice
  2. Without the kolibri1 tool-call parser and enable-auto-tool-choice, tool calls come back as text in tool_call tags
  3. The plugin supports one vLLM minor version, 0.29. vLLM 0.33.0 loads the model without it, but has no kolibri1 tool or reasoning parser
  4. Thinking is on by default at high effort. Pass reasoning_effort none or enable_thinking false in chat_template_kwargs for short tasks
  5. Recommended sampling is temperature 1.0, top_p 0.97 and top_k 128
  6. Past 262,144 tokens, add --max-model-len 1048576 and the max_position_embeddings override in --hf-overrides, though Aleph Alpha recommends staying at or below 262,144
  7. With Transformers 5.20 or later, tokenizer.parse_response returns the answer in content and the reasoning in thinking
  8. On the reference machine the FP8 build fits by size, but no document confirms vLLM runs FP8 on gfx1151, and Aleph Alpha ships no GGUF for llama.cpp or Ollama
  9. Validate tool results in your own code, as the card asks

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, EXAONE 4.5 33B or Kolibri-1?

EXAONE 4.5 33B and Kolibri-1 score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 61 (C) and 61 (C). Kolibri-1 leads on risk, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with EXAONE 4.5 33B or Kolibri-1

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.

Get an auditSee a sample report