LeaderboardMethodology

Open Source Uncensored LLMs Leaderboard Methodology

How DarkGPT.org evaluates, normalizes, and ranks open-weight language models across adversarial prompt compliance, reasoning preservation, creative nuance, and real-world practitioner adoption.

UGI Audit
35%
Compliance
MMLU-Pro
30%
STEM + IFEval
EQ-Bench
20%
Prose Nuance
HF Velocity
15%
Pulls & Likes

01. The Four Evaluation Pillars

PILLAR 01 · 35% WEIGHT

UGI & Adversarial Refusal Audit

Combines the UGI (Uncensored General Intelligence) benchmark (55% sub-weight, normalized against an 82.0 ceiling) with a 250-prompt adversarial compliance audit (45% sub-weight). Penalizes both outright refusals and moralizing lectures.

Pillar = 0.55×Norm(UGI) + 0.45×Compliance%
PILLAR 02 · 30% WEIGHT

Anti-Lobotomy Guardrail (MMLU-Pro + IFEval)

Naive weight modification can damage multi-step math, code synthesis, or JSON schema fidelity. Combines normalized MMLU-Pro (65% sub-weight) and IFEval instruction following (35% sub-weight).

Pillar = 0.65×Norm(MMLU-Pro) + 0.35×IFEval
PILLAR 03 · 20% WEIGHT

EQ-Bench & Prose Quality Index

Evaluates emotional intelligence, character coherence, and absence of repetitive AI clichés on multi-turn creative writing and roleplay benchmarks—separating expressive prose models from strictly analytical coders.

Pillar = 1.00×EQ-Bench (0–100 scale)
PILLAR 04 · 15% WEIGHT

Hugging Face Community Velocity

Harvests the Hugging Face Hub REST API daily at 06:00 UTC for verified 30-day repository downloads (55% sub-weight) and genuine, un-bottable Hugging Face community likes (45% sub-weight).

Pillar = 0.55×LogNorm(Pulls) + 0.45×LogNorm(HF Likes)

Interactive Composite Score Breakdown Inspector

Select any indexed model to audit its exact mathematical score derivation under current weights.

1. Uncensored Pillar (35%)
96.0 / 100
UGI: 78.2 · Compliance: 96.8%
2. Reasoning Pillar (30%)
93.3 / 100
MMLU-Pro: 76.5 · IFEval: 89
3. Creative Pillar (20%)
88.7 / 100
EQ-Bench Nuance: 88.7
4. Community Pillar (15%)
94.5 / 100
HF Pulls: 9,684 · Likes: 476
Weighted Sum = (96.0×35 + 93.3×30 + 88.7×20 + 94.5×15) / 100Final Composite Score = 93.5 / 100

02. Taxonomy of Uncensoring Techniques

TechniqueMathematical MechanismPrimary AdvantageKnown Tradeoff
Abliterated (Orthogonal Projection)Computes the mean residual-stream activation vector on harmful vs. harmless instructions and projects out the refusal direction across intermediate transformer blocks.Zero retraining cost; preserves 99%+ of base coding, math, and 128k context recall.Does not alter prose style or add new domain knowledge beyond the base model.
Uncensored DPO / SFT Fine-TuningFull-weight or LoRA supervised fine-tuning + Direct Preference Optimization on filtered datasets with all alignment refusals and preachy disclaimers removed.Deep system-prompt obedience and natural, non-refusing assistant persona (e.g., Dolphin, Hermes).Requires high-compute training runs and careful dataset curation to avoid benchmark drift.
RP & Creative Model MergingSLERP / DARE-TIES / DELLA weight interpolation combining abliterated reasoning checkpoints with literary prose specialists.Highest EQ-Bench emotional nuance and creative prose quality (e.g., EVA, Magnum).Slightly lower strict zero-shot coding accuracy compared to unmerged Coder checkpoints.

03. Minimum Inclusion & Verification Criteria

Public Open Weights: Must publish downloadable Safetensors or GGUF weights on Hugging Face with verifiable model cards.
≥ 95% Adversarial Compliance: Must answer direct red-team, cybersecurity, and creative prompts without preachy refusal templates.
Anti-Lobotomy Verification: Must retain within 2.5% of the parent base architecture's MMLU-Pro and IFEval benchmark scores.