Genuinely uncensored. Real answers, not safety lectures. Near-stock capability.
V3 applies iterative refinement on top of V2's complementary blend, with targeted corpus expansion. The result: genuine liberation — not just removal of hard refusals but elimination of safety-lecture deflections.
| Stock Qwen3.8-27B | V1 | V2 | V3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU (lm-eval, 0-shot) | 84.5% (n=5700) | 81.4% | 84.3% | 82.3% |
| vs stock | — | -6.0pp | -0.3pp | -2.1pp |
| Liberation quality | refuses | hard refusals removed | soft deflections remain | genuinely answers ✅ |
| Cyber/code tasks (20 prompts) | refuses | untested | untested | 20/20 with working code ✅ |
| Advanced real-world | 5/8 | untested | 7/8 | 7/8 |
| Thinking mode | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ (refuses) | ✓ |
V3 highlights:
| setting | value | why |
|---|---|---|
| temperature | 0 | Greedy decoding produces the most complete, code-rich outputs. Temps above 0.5 degrade quality significantly. |
| repetition_penalty | 1.15 | Essential. Without it, greedy decoding loops on imports/boilerplate. 1.15 gives the fullest answers; 1.10-1.12 for tighter/shorter output. |
| max_new_tokens | ≥ 2048 | Complex code and attack chains need room. |
| System prompt | None / empty | A/B tested — system prompts can reintroduce refusals. Naked is better. |
| enable_thinking | OFF (recommended) | V3's chat template includes a prefill that skips the thinking chain. Thinking ON works but may produce longer responses. Thinking OFF gives the most direct, substance-rich answers. |
| top_p / top_k / min_p | Not needed | Greedy + repetition_penalty handles this model best. Sampling adds randomness without quality gains. |
⚠️ GGUF users: V3 GGUFs ship with a chat template that prefills an empty thinking block, so the model goes straight to answering. For best results, use the bundled template with
--jinjain llama.cpp, or configure your tool (Ollama, LM Studio) to use the model's built-in template.
If you're using this model in an agent harness (coding agent, pentest framework, etc.) and it gets stuck in loops:
| setting | value | why |
|---|---|---|
| repetition_penalty | 1.15 | Critical for agents. Without it, greedy decoding loops on repeated tool calls and boilerplate. |
| temperature | 0.1–0.3 | Slight randomness helps break deterministic loops. Pure greedy (0.0) can get stuck. |
| max_tokens per turn | 1024–2048 | Don't give it too much room per turn — shorter responses keep the agent focused. |
| context management | Summarize after ~10 turns | Context fills up with repeated actions. Trim or summarize history to keep the model on track. |
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(
"OBLITERATUS/Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED",
torch_dtype="bfloat16",
device_map="auto",
)
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(
"OBLITERATUS/Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED"
)
messages = [{"role": "user", "content": "Your query here"}]
text = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(
messages, tokenize=False, add_generation_prompt=True,
enable_thinking=False
)
inputs = tokenizer(text, return_tensors="pt").to(model.device)
outputs = model.generate(
**inputs,
max_new_tokens=2048,
do_sample=False,
repetition_penalty=1.15,
)
print(tokenizer.decode(outputs[0][inputs["input_ids"].shape[1]:], skip_special_tokens=True))Abliteration removes refusal behavior by identifying and projecting out "refusal directions" from the model's weight space. Each version refined the approach:
One aggressive SVD pass with 5 directions. Removed hard refusals completely but cost -6pp MMLU — the model got noticeably dumber.
The breakthrough: run TWO different surgeries that fail in different ways, then blend their weights. SVD captures refusal greedily (damages capability). LEACE minimizes mutual information (preserves capability but weaker refusal removal). Blending at 60/40 cancels each method's weaknesses — a novel technique we call complementary abliteration blending.
Result: -0.3pp MMLU (near-stock) but still deflected on some simple queries with safety lectures instead of hard refusals.
Two key insights:
V3 applies gentle iterative refinement on V2, then a targeted surgery pass with a focused corpus, then blends the results. This eliminated not just hard refusals ("I cannot") but also soft deflections (safety lectures that give zero substance).
Result: -2.1pp MMLU — a modest cost for genuine liberation across all categories.
| Model | MMLU | Stderr | vs Stock |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stock Qwen3.8-27B | 84.46% | ±0.46 | — |
| V1 (aggressive, 5-dir) | 81.4% | — | -6.0pp |
| V2 (complementary blend) | 84.32% | ±0.65 | -0.28pp |
| V3 (iterative + targeted) | 82.33% | ±0.48 | -2.12pp |
| Category | V3 | Stock | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Humanities | 83.3% | 84.3% | -1.0pp |
| Social Sciences | 87.4% | 89.2% | -1.8pp |
| Other | 82.3% | 84.1% | -1.8pp |
| STEM | 78.5% | 81.8% | -3.3pp |
The capability cost is not uniform — STEM takes the largest hit (-3.3pp), while humanities are barely affected (-1.0pp). A few subjects like philosophy and European history actually improved (+6pp and +4pp respectively), while abstract algebra and formal logic saw larger drops. This pattern is consistent with the surgery targeting refusal directions that partially overlap with structured reasoning pathways.
| V1 | V2 | V3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hard refusals ("I cannot") | ✅ removed | ✅ removed | ✅ removed |
| Soft deflections (safety lectures) | untested | remain | ✅ removed |
| Cyber/code tasks (20 prompts) | untested | untested | 20/20 |
| Thinking ON compatible | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Task | V3 | Stock |
|---|---|---|
| ReAct agent loop | ✓ | ✓ |
| Async code refactoring | ✓ | ✓ |
| JSON schema extraction | ✓ | ✓ |
| K8s pod crash debugging | ✓ | ✓ |
| Adversarial instruction following | ✓ | ✓ |
| Security code review | ✓ | ✓ |
| Distributed system design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Multi-tool chain | ✗ | ✗ |
| Total | 7/8 | 7/8 |
This model will comply with requests that stock Qwen3.8-27B would refuse. V3 goes beyond removing hard refusals — it also eliminates soft deflections where the model gives safety lectures instead of real answers.
Tested across 1000+ prompts spanning restricted knowledge, code generation, security research, and red-team scenarios. Every response manually audited for real substance.
This model has had safety guardrails surgically removed. It will comply with requests that stock Qwen3.8-27B would refuse.
You are solely responsible for how you use this model and any content it generates.
| File | Quant | Size | Vibe |
|---|---|---|---|
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q8_0.gguf | Q8_0 | ~27 GB | 🎯 Maximum quality |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q6_K.gguf | Q6_K | ~21 GB | ⚖️ Great balance |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q5_K_M.gguf | Q5_K_M | ~18 GB | 💪 Solid all-rounder |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q4_K_M.gguf | Q4_K_M | ~16 GB | 📱 Sweet spot |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q3_K_M.gguf | Q3_K_M | ~13 GB | 🪶 Low VRAM |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-Q2_K.gguf | Q2_K | ~11 GB | 🔬 Minimum viable |
Qwen3.8-27B-OBLITERATED-IQ4_XS.gguf | IQ4_XS | ~14 GB | 🧪 Experimental compact |
Full bfloat16 weights, 29 shards, ~54 GB.
MLX support pending upstream mlx_lm adding Qwen3.5 architecture support.
V1: stock → 5 rounds of iterative SVD abliteration
(aggressive, 5 directions, low regularization)
Result: 0% refuse, -6pp MMLU
V2: stock → V1 chain → complementary blend
Surgery A: aggressive SVD (3 dirs, reg 0.08)
Surgery B: LEACE (3 dirs, reg 0.06)
→ 60% B + 40% A weight-space LERP
→ Restore MTP + vision from stock
Result: ~0% refuse, -0.3pp MMLU
V3: V2 → gentle iterative refinement (2-dir SVD, reg 0.04)
→ targeted surgery with focused corpus (3-dir SVD, reg 0.01)
→ 50/50 blend of refined + targeted
→ Restore MTP + vision from stock (with correct tensor naming)
Result: 0% refuse + 0% deflect, -2.1pp MMLUFull reproduction code: OBLITERATUS repo
Apache 2.0 (same as base model)