Overview
Strands Decider Gemma 4 is a family of four open decision models that AWS's Strands Labs published on Hugging Face on October 9, 2026 and announced on the Strands Agents blog on October 15, 2026. The four sizes, strands-decider-E2B-gemma4-v1-2610, E4B, 12B and 26B-A4B, are the first Strands deciders built on Google's Gemma 4 (on gemma-4-E2B-it, E4B-it, 12B-it and 26B-A4B-it), following Strands Decider 2B on Qwen3.5-2B-Base from October 1, 2026. Like that model, they do not generate text: they pick between options or rate something on a scale and return a confidence with every answer, for the decisions inside agentic workflows such as routing, checking tool arguments, guardrails and evaluations. All four accept the same three question types, noul (yes/no), choice (one of N) and score (a level on an ordered scale), so a workflow can switch sizes without rewriting its questions.
Each size ships its own LoRA adapter on the Gemma 4 text decoder and a small readout head; the loader fetches the matching Gemma 4 base weights separately. Every checkpoint is a soup of three training runs with seeds 0, 1 and 2: each layer's LoRA update is the exact mean of the three seeds' updates, stored as one rank-48 adapter, and an option's score is the mean of the three heads' scores, after which the soup is calibrated with one temperature per question type. Each seed trained for one epoch of 4,109 steps on a host with eight NVIDIA H100 80GB GPUs, on 123,339 rows of the Hobson v21 data recipe plus 12,263 code-task rows, using Qwen3.5-4B's output distributions as targets where that teacher agreed with the gold label. The same day, Strands Labs also published strands-decider-2B-qwen3.5-v1-2610, a retrained Qwen3.5-2B decider under the new naming scheme strands-decider-<size>-<base>-v<N>-<YYMM>.
On JevBench v1's 231 public tasks with a 4,096-token window, the four sizes answer 180 (77.9%), 187 (81.0%), 200 (86.6%) and 207 (89.6%) tasks correctly, with Brier scores falling from 0.313 to 0.162. The launch post reports median latencies per question on one NVIDIA H100 80 GB of 102 ms (E2B), 139 ms (E4B), 136 ms (12B) and 245 ms (26B-A4B), and notes that the 12B scored about three points below the 26B-A4B with roughly 45% lower median latency in that run. Strands Labs recommends starting with E2B and moving up only if it misses the target. The README lists approximate bf16 GPU memory of 9 GB, 15 GB, 23 GB and 51 GB for the four sizes.
| Released | 2026-10-09 |
|---|---|
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Weights | Open weights |
| Parameters | Four sizes on Gemma 4 bases: E2B, E4B, 12B and 26B-A4B (a mixture-of-experts model that activates about 4B of its 26B parameters). Each release is a rank-48 LoRA adapter plus a small readout head; the Gemma 4 base weights are downloaded separately. |
| Architecture | LoRA adapter on the Gemma 4 text decoder plus a readout head (head.safetensors) that scores the options of typed noul, choice and score questions; each checkpoint is a soup of three training seeds whose LoRA updates and head scores are averaged, then calibrated with one temperature per question type |
| Modalities | Text |
| Status | Generally available — adapters and readout heads on Hugging Face (StrandsAgents, mirrored under amazon) |
Benchmarks
The four Gemma 4 deciders and the Qwen3.5 2B v1-2610 decider released alongside them, as listed in the strands-decider README. JevBench is the 231-task public set at a 4,096-token window; held-out columns are the release's internal evaluation sets; latency is the median per JevBench question on one H100.
| Benchmark | E2B (Gemma 4) | E4B (Gemma 4) | 12B (Gemma 4) | 26B-A4B (Gemma 4) | 2B (Qwen3.5) v1-2610 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JevBench public, tasks right of 231 | 180 | 187 | 200 | 207 | 180 |
| JevBench public, Brier score (lower is better) | 0.313 | 0.243 | 0.173 | 0.162 | 0.28 |
| Held-out short tasks (accuracy) | 0.652 | 0.684 | 0.708 | 0.708 | — |
| Held-out code tasks (accuracy) | 0.773 | 0.815 | 0.87 | 0.859 | — |
| Decision Index 0.2.1, balanced skill | 29.78 | 39.42 | 47.14 | 48.69 | — |
| GPU memory, bf16 (approx.) | 9 GB | 15 GB | 23 GB | 51 GB | — |
| Median latency per question, one H100 | 102 ms | 139 ms | 136 ms | 245 ms | — |
This model's scores
- JevBench v1, public set (231 tasks), 26B-A4B89.6%
- JevBench v1, public set (231 tasks), 12B86.6%
- JevBench v1, public set (231 tasks), E4B81%
- JevBench v1, public set (231 tasks), E2B77.9%
Scores on a 0–100 scale (25-point gridlines); higher is better. Each benchmark links to its published source.
Strengths
- 207 of JevBench v1's 231 public tasks (89.6%) for the 26B-A4B, with a Brier score of 0.162 and an expected calibration error of 0.051
- 200 of 231 (86.6%) for the 12B at a 136 ms median per question on one H100, against 245 ms for the 26B-A4B
- The same noul, choice and score questions work across all four sizes, so a model can be swapped by changing its ID
- 48.69 on Decision Index 0.2.1 (balanced skill) for the 26B-A4B and 47.14 for the 12B
- Apache-2.0 adapters, readout heads and code, with the training recipe in the public repository
Best for
- Reach for it to route requests, check tool arguments or apply guardrails inside a Strands agent when the 2B decider is not accurate enough for the task.
- Reach for the 12B when accuracy matters but latency is tight: in the launch run it scored about three points below the 26B-A4B at roughly 45% lower median latency.
- Reach for it to score or classify outputs in an evaluation pipeline, acting only on answers above a confidence threshold tested on your own traffic.
- Look elsewhere for long, multi-step documents, which the model cards list as a weak spot, or for anything that needs generated text.
How to access
| Provider | Model ID |
|---|---|
| Hugging Face (26B-A4B weights) ↗ | StrandsAgents/strands-decider-26B-A4B-gemma4-v1-2610 |
| Hugging Face (12B weights) ↗ | StrandsAgents/strands-decider-12B-gemma4-v1-2610 |
| Hugging Face (E4B weights) ↗ | StrandsAgents/strands-decider-E4B-gemma4-v1-2610 |
| Hugging Face (E2B weights) ↗ | StrandsAgents/strands-decider-E2B-gemma4-v1-2610 |
Strands Decider (open decision models) — every version
The full lineage of the Strands Decider (open decision models) line, newest first. Every version has its own page — click any to compare specs, benchmarks and pricing.
| Version | Released | Context | License |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strands Decider Gemma 4current | 2026-10-09 | — | Apache-2.0 |
| Strands Decider 2B | 2026-10-01 | — | Apache-2.0 |
FAQ
What is Strands Decider Gemma 4?
A family of four Apache-2.0 decision models from AWS Strands Labs, published on Hugging Face on October 9, 2026: E2B, E4B, 12B and 26B-A4B, built on the matching Gemma 4 instruction-tuned models. Instead of generating text, each answers yes/no (noul), one-of-N (choice) and ordered-scale (score) questions with per-option probabilities, for decisions inside agentic workflows.
How does it differ from Strands Decider 2B?
Strands Decider 2B (October 1, 2026) is built on Qwen3.5-2B-Base and scores 167 of JevBench's 231 public tasks. The Gemma 4 family uses larger Gemma 4 bases, a rank-48 LoRA soup of three seeds, a teacher (Qwen3.5-4B) and a larger training mix, and scores 180 to 207 of the same 231 tasks depending on size.
Which size should I pick?
The launch post recommends starting with E2B and trying E4B and 12B before 26B-A4B. In its H100 run the 12B scored about three points below the 26B-A4B on JevBench with roughly 45% lower median latency (136 ms against 245 ms).
What hardware does it need?
The README lists approximate bf16 GPU memory of 9 GB for E2B, 15 GB for E4B, 23 GB for 12B and 51 GB for 26B-A4B. Published latencies are medians per JevBench question on one NVIDIA H100 80 GB; the post advises measuring on your own serving stack.
How do I run it?
Install strands-decider 0.2.0 or later (pip install "strands-decider>=0.2.0", Python 3.10+) and call strands-decider ask with a model ID such as StrandsAgents/strands-decider-E4B-gemma4-v1-2610, a --state text and --choice, --noul or --score questions. strands-decider serve runs a local HTTP server bound to 127.0.0.1 without authentication.
What are its known limitations?
The model cards say the models may return the same answer when only the question changes, struggle with long multi-step documents, transfer score and noul questions poorly to rubrics unlike the training mix, and were calibrated on short held-out classification tasks, so confidence thresholds should be tested on your own traffic.