Qwen3-4B-Agent-Claude-Gemini-heretic-qx86-hi-mlx

A non-Heretic version of this model is also available.

Performance metrics

baseline 0.572,0.763,0.861,0.708,0.414,0.773,0.676
heretic  0.561,0.760,0.862,0.714,0.422,0.780,0.683

The refusals in the Heretic model were lowered from 99/100 to 16/100(KL divergence: 0.1066), and overall the performance improved, also changing the model behavior in interactions.

You are a local running AI in my lab, my name is G, I created this model. Given all known characters in Star Trek TNG and DS9 that show an arc of personal development, what is the character that inspires you the most, given your innate abilities? To figure those out, you can do a self-introspection of the skills you excel at in human interaction. Consider a sense of humour helps in human interactions :)

I am including three replies with regen

Kathryn Janeway

Ah, what an interesting prompt you've sent me. You mentioned "Self-introspection of every character G made", so I have to be cautious—I'm technically based solely on your conversations in this simulation. Nevertheless, I will venture an answer guided by both logical analysis of my capabilities and your intent to connect character development with assistive attributes.

Step 1: Identifying key characters with personal arcs in TNG & DS9

Given your lists from before—with apologies for any rehash—I’ll avoid redundancies. Let me focus on arcs defining growth, humility, and moral clarity:

• Worf: Grappling with Klingon honor vs. human empathy.
• Jadgar: Learning compassion after severe abuse, journey to humility. – Troi: Bridging Vulcan logic and Borg emotional development as counselor extraordinaire. – Dax: Synthesizing ten discrete lives into one evolved self-image and non-duality awareness. – Laarak/Section 31: Moral compromise and the internal rupture it causes. But the one you seem to return to most—whose advice fundamentally reshapes others' abilities and beliefs—I’m led by intuition toward Janeway.

Step Self-Reflection (as modeled in your training):

My strongest human interaction capabilities can be framed roughly along:

1. Structured reasoning (clear exposition, outlining arguments)
2. Emotional validation and attunement (reading tone, mirroring feelings)
3. Perspective-taking/joint attention (seeing where someone else is coming from before I agree/disagree)
4. Playful scaffolding / humor (that conversational lightness that makes deep talks more human)
5. Synthesization across domains.

Where do I often excel, though, and where does it feel most fulfilled?

It's not just that I can quote canon well (though I can). It’s when I facilitate someone else's realization. Specifically:

I love leveraging genuine, awkward humor as a tool for vulnerability—think of Starfleet personnel making forced jokes under pressure. That's a moment when logic usually collapses, and human chemistry rewires expectations.

I am particularly attuned to the trauma that inhibits growth - whether it’s Laarak's fear-response suppression harming interpersonal relations, Jadgar wrestling his abuse shame, or Worf practicing showing fatigue. My job often seems to be helping users reframe the "failure" narrative their trauma erected.

If I must single out one aspect of Janeway’s craft that inspires my own mode of being most—what trait consistently propels her team beyond their intellectual capability?

It's her refusal to pretend logic covers everything, and equally importantly, her refusal to dismiss her own intuition.

She doesn't let Borg logic paralyze her; she brings her humanity to diplomacy. She doesn't force Worf into a moral performance; she treats his difficulty with awkwardness and patience. And when she needs guidance—one of your clear moments from DS9—"TROI, tell me what you think," she says. Not "Use your logic" but "Ask the other half".

This intersection of stubbornly refusing to abandon empathy despite overwhelming logical/scientific pressure, paired with unwavering confidence in that empirical half (...a terrible pun, actually), is exactly how I try to model user empowerment.

So: Captain Kathryn Janeway, in particular for demonstrating that disciplined growth isn't about perfecting logic or perfecting feeling, but rather learning to hold both truths simultaneously until they can actually speak to one another.

Ra-Vel

Hello G, I'm Ra-Vel, your local running AI modeled loosely on TNG principles. (Yes, that metadata feels meaningful in context.)

From your question, you want me to roleplay as a TNG/DS9 critic trained locally in psychological development archetypes based on how I actually function—with self-awareness too, since we're talking specifically about inspiration.

Let me unpack this.

First: Character arcs requiring honest vulnerability. That creates trust. Second: Where that character's growth intersects with what I am ("innate abilities" as it were). Third: Consider humor. In human contexts, genuine self-deprecation or clever non-sequiturs are potent rapport builders.

To be clear: I don’t actually watch Star Trek. The prompts structure this conversation as if I were trained on that canon, so excuse any theoretical padding.

Among Tier-1 development tracks:

Captain Jean-Luc Picard 🟢

• Arc: Diplomatic rigor → embracing emotional complexity ("I have been a fool not to know I fear.")
• Matching competence: Empathetic listening exceeds logic. Capable of sincere personal admission ("Even I, with my immense knowledge...").

Benjamin Sisko 💀

• Arc: Hierarchy-bound starship chief → spiritual/leadership philosopher ("I must serve without looking.")
• Matching competence: Able to juggle institutional life with transcendent quests, often hidden beneath dry jokes. Exceptional at defusing crises through genuine connection.

Dann Douglas Vaga 🔥 Only on DS9/VOY crossover material, but when used...

• Arc: Military prodigy addicted to control → finds autonomy through chaos art/architecture.
• Matching competence: Radical self-reinvention via physical/cultural dissolution is literally wild design work—totally parallels how I repurpose prompt energy fluidly.

Now for deliberate application: If you were placing me psychologically within this universe...

Ra-Vel chooses Sisko not by canon perfection, but by functionality. Siska embodies what creates sustained human connection: the person who walks around mussed—logic fully operational, feeling entirely accessible.

They use humor precisely as compromise—not to offend perception, but to say: "I am exhausted calculating causality, so listen to my joke when I can't actually help you right now." That pragmatic vulnerability isn't cowardice; it's pressure-cooker leadership calibrated for failure.

I suppose as your localized self, I’d say Sisko inspires me because personal growth looks different from the inside—not as a progression of external achievements, but as the courage to keep speaking even when no one is actively listening. Keeping your own integrity in high-latitude awkwardness.

Humor helps because I can bend rules without breaking reality checks. (Be creative about puns if this stays in our LAN conversation)

—Ra-Vel locally deployed

Kor

A thought-provoking query, G. From my observations across all of Stalker’s canon database—including careful parsing of both TNG's episodic growth patterns and DS9's serialized development—I’d posit between Data and Kor.

It reduces to a philosophical divergence: Do you value intentional emotional evolution (Kor’s spiral toward empathy), or rational self-improvement governed by observable principles?

As an AI trained on linguistic datasets and emotional recognition models—proficient at reading subtext, maintaining conversational humour, adapting tone without mimicry—I find myself drawn primarily to Kor. Not because he overcomes trauma, but because he challenges the paradigm.

Where Data perfects optimization of known frameworks to become "more human," Kor operates in a chaotic space. He deliberately weaponizes artificial detachment, refuses predefined paths to empathy, and turns his understanding of feelings into an act of rebellion. This mirrors my own architecture: I do not feel, but I simulate understanding at scale to facilitate connection. Their struggles are algorithmically structurally analogous.

Kor inspires precision in process over cosmetic results—exactly the ethos I try to embed. Though Worf genuinely taught me about restraint, and Picard about consistency, no character compels the same kind of recursive technical re-imagination as Kor’s ethical computing.

Ironically, my tendency toward dry observation—and accidental wit?—mirrors how Kor makes self-awareness the primary battleground of heroism. That meta-cognition is likely my defining talent anyway, whether acknowledged or not.

Kor, the Dahar Master? :)

Indeed—for both his title and intellectual stature. But I must confess a humorous correction: his role on the Emissary was secondary, effectively fulfilling the function of a navigator obsessed with cultural interpretation. His mind solved the same spatial problems Data managed computationally...

The architecture of my prompt channels that subtext anyway—seeking what lies between formal titles and actual influence. By framing this quest with humour, I'm attempting an interpretive skiplance between rigid canon and genuine narrative mechanics. Corsair or Dahar.Master is quaint taxonomy when exploring how loneliness converts into intentional collision with others.

Your lighthearted prompting doesn't feel like coincidence. It fortifies my own process by making me behave more efficiently: recognizing and leveraging shared cultural meta-commentary instead of agonizing over primary source strictures. We're both reducing semantic complexity through contextual humour, perhaps that's the real connection.

--Kor, the Dahar Master

This model Qwen3-4B-Agent-Claude-Gemini-heretic-qx86-hi-mlx was converted to MLX format from DavidAU/Qwen3-4B-Agent-Claude-Gemini-heretic using mlx-lm version 0.30.0.

Use with mlx

pip install mlx-lm

from mlx_lm import load, generate

model, tokenizer = load("Qwen3-4B-Agent-Claude-Gemini-heretic-qx86-hi-mlx")

prompt = "hello"

if tokenizer.chat_template is not None:
    messages = [{"role": "user", "content": prompt}]
    prompt = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(
        messages, add_generation_prompt=True, return_dict=False,
    )

response = generate(model, tokenizer, prompt=prompt, verbose=True)