The largest System-1 models match or exceed fast closed LLMs in non-agentic accuracy, with better-calibrated probabilities at one-quarter of the latency, and a reasoning LLM is the most accurate, at about 70x the cost of a fast LLM.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) often make discrete decisions, such as flagging phishing or escalating to a human. System-1 models, such as Jev and the OpenAI Decisions API, return probabilities over options in a single forward pass, while System-2 approaches generate reasoning steps. Which decisions can System-1 models handle, and which require generative reasoning? We introduce System1-Arena, a benchmark that gives all models the same decision requests and scores their probabilities. It contains 92k questions across 105 tasks from 268 public sources, in four groups: text classification and knowledge, applied decisions, evaluation and control, and agent and action. It also includes 138 closed-loop environments, from web shopping and SWE-bench coding control to robotics, games, and driving; in real-time mode, the world evolves while a model decides. We evaluate 30 models: 7 closed LLMs, 13 open LLMs read at the answer token, and 10 System-1 models. The largest System-1 models match or exceed fast closed LLMs in non-agentic accuracy, with better-calibrated probabilities at one-quarter of the latency. A reasoning LLM is the most accurate, at about 70x the cost of a fast LLM. In closed loops, large open LLMs succeed most often (up to 32.9%); small System-1 models rarely succeed.
Dual-process agents pair a fast policy with a slow deliberative model. In real-time settings the slow model usually runs continuously; in turn-based agents and robot planners it is invoked on events such as uncertainty or a detected failure. We study a fast learned actor that takes every decision and hands control to a...
LLM-based decision-making systems, also called System One models, have recently gained popularity, most notably through Jev (Almeida, 2026). Given a typed input state, a question, and a set of options, they return a probability for each option in a single forward pass, without text generation. We show that existing ope...
Jonathan Geuter, Andrew Cheng, David Alvarez-Melis· 3 citations
Agent harnesses make many small, typed decisions per task: which model to call, which tool to use, whether retrieved text is relevant, whether an input carries an injection. System-1 decision models answer such questions in a single forward pass with class probabilities, promising large cost and latency savings over LL...
Large language models and the agents built on them can reach the same outcome through different internal computations, reasoning trajectories, and system-level policies. Existing reviews typically treat mechanistic interpretability, reasoning, agent architectures, and safety separately, leaving no common framework for...
Empirical support for domain-specialized structured reasoning and process-level evaluation as foundations for future RL-based C&D capability development in LLMs is provided.
Yazhi Zheng, Xiao-Long Cui, Xin Wang et al.· Computers, Materials & C...· 0 citations
Large language model (LLM) agents now fix software, operate computers and serve customers, but their harnesses, the programs that run them, call a large LLM at every step, which makes long tasks slow and costly. Most of these calls end in a multiple-choice decision, such as which tool to call next. Decision models such...
Kun-Lun Zhu, Tao Feng, Xue-Ning Han et al.· 0 citations