I'm not convinced this is useful for problems most people face using models, it seems a very niche academic concern frankly and an incredibly complex system to prove not very much.
I'm not convinced this is useful for problems most people face using models, it seems a very niche academic concern frankly and an incredibly complex system to prove not very much.
2. Models only change weekly for closed frontier models and even then they should be reporting model "sub-versions" if only for observability purposes.
3. This doesn't really hold true. Kimi and DS release their models on a monthly or bi-weekly cycle and while it's still DS-v4.1-Flash or whatever, under the hood it's DS-v4.1-Flash-1017 or some other date code identifier of which specific model it is and that is both exposed to the user and that model version can be requested explicitly by the user.
You're talking about this as if a bug or defect in their inference stack has no impact on you as the customer.