🧠 imagine-v11
100% on held-out. Predicate placement fixed. Analytical SQL, finally real.
Natural language in. Correct PostgreSQL out. ~1B parameters. No GPU. No API key. No metered inference.
Part of project imagine — Interchained
The failure that built v11
v10 was asked, live:
"Every customer with total spending on completed orders, include zeros."
It returned:
SELECT c.id, c.name, COALESCE(SUM(o.total), 0) AS total_spending
FROM customers c
LEFT JOIN orders o ON c.id = o.customer_id
WHERE o.status = 'completed' -- ← the bug. WHERE runs AFTER the join.
GROUP BY c.id, c.name
ORDER BY total_spending DESC;
The WHERE silently converts the outer join to an inner join. Every zero-spend customer — the exact rows the question asked for — vanishes. The predicate belongs in ON:
SELECT c.id, c.name, COALESCE(SUM(o.total), 0) AS total_spending
FROM customers c
LEFT JOIN orders o ON c.id = o.customer_id AND o.status = 'completed'
GROUP BY c.id, c.name
ORDER BY total_spending DESC, c.id ASC;
v10 knew the shape of the answer but not where the filter lives. v11 does.
🎯 What v11 adds
Where v10 added complex analytical queries, v11 adds predicate placement — knowing where each clause belongs:
- ON-clause predicates — filters on the nullable side of an outer join live in
ON, neverWHERE - Conditional aggregation —
SUM(CASE WHEN ...)patterns for filtered totals - Anti-join patterns —
NOT EXISTS/LEFT JOIN ... IS NULLfor absence queries - Analytical templates, actually working — v10's analytical set silently generated zero candidates (a child-detection heuristic that never matched plural table names); v11 fixes the generator and ships 18 real analytical pairs
📊 The numbers
| Model | Held-out (telemetry) | Protocol | Execute rate | Invented cols |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| imagine-v8 | 50.0% (20/40) | 100% | — | — |
| imagine-v9 | 90.0% (36/40) | 100% | 97.5% | 0 |
| imagine-v10 | 100.0% (40/40) | 100% | 100% | 0 |
| imagine-v11 | 100.0% (40/40) | 100% | 100% | 0 |
Perfect score, held. Zero wrong answers. Zero hallucinations. Zero refusals.
🧬 How v11 was built
Two-stage fine-tuning from Interchained/imagine-v10, on an NVIDIA B200:
Stage 1 — Full fine-tune (smoke)
- Corpus: 3,284 admitted pairs (99.85% gate admit rate)
- New: Predicate-placement templates (ON-clause, conditional aggregation, anti-join) + working analytical templates
- Epochs: 3, LR 1e-5, cosine schedule
- Final loss: 0.0007 (v10 was 0.0052 — 7x better)
- Time: 3.3 min on B200, 33k tok/s
Stage 2 — LoRA refinement
- Base: v11-smoke checkpoint
- Rank: 16, LR 5e-6
- Epochs: 3
- Final loss: 0.0000
- Time: 4.2 min on B200
- Adapter folded into full checkpoint
The corpus
3,289 candidates forged, 3,284 admitted:
| Schema | Templates | Analytical | Predicate | Writes | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| shop | 356 | 3 | 9 | 396 | 764 |
| clinic | 545 | 6 | 36 | 280 | 867 |
| library | 481 | 6 | 0 | 262 | 749 |
| fleet | 297 | 3 | 0 | 231 | 531 |
| audit | 252 | 0 | 0 | 126 | 378 |
Nothing enters training that a live database hasn't agreed with.
🔬 The execution gate
Every candidate goes through L0–L4:
candidate SQL ──► L0 real PostgreSQL parser not a regex
L1 read-only + bounded no writes, no sleeps
L2 EXPLAIN on live schema hallucinations die HERE
L3 execute, timed, capped real rows
L4 SAME ANSWER as ref? ◄── the one that matters
▼
admitted to corpus
68/68 gate tests passing. The gate is the truth authority — not a bigger model, not vibes.
📦 Output protocol
SQL wrapped in sentinel blocks:
<<<SQL>>>
SELECT c.id, c.name, COALESCE(SUM(o.total), 0) AS total_spending
FROM customers c
LEFT JOIN orders o ON c.id = o.customer_id AND o.status = 'completed'
GROUP BY c.id, c.name
ORDER BY total_spending DESC, c.id ASC;
<<<END>>>
Can also refuse:
| block | meaning |
|---|---|
<<<SQL>>> |
here is your query |
<<<UNANSWERABLE>>> |
this schema cannot answer that |
<<<CLARIFY>>> |
ambiguous — here's what's missing |
⚠️ A truncated generation is not an answer. An unterminated block extracts to nothing.
💻 Loading v11
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
import torch
model_id = "Interchained/imagine-v11"
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(model_id)
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(
model_id,
torch_dtype=torch.bfloat16,
device_map="auto",
)
# Ask for a predicate-placement query — v10's failure mode
prompt = """Schema:
customers(id, name)
orders(id, customer_id, total, status)
List every customer ID, name, and total completed spending.
Include customers with no completed orders (show 0).
Sort by spending descending, then ID ascending."""
inputs = tokenizer(prompt, return_tensors="pt").to(model.device)
with torch.no_grad():
output = model.generate(inputs["input_ids"], max_new_tokens=256, do_sample=False)
print(tokenizer.decode(output[0], skip_special_tokens=True))
🎯 Identity
The deployed model identity is Imagine.
Built and fine-tuned by Interchained.
DeepSeek-Coder is part of the upstream lineage (via v8 → v9 → v10 → v11), but the deployed identity is Imagine.
⚡ Local-first
Runs on your hardware. No API key. No metered inference. No cloud dependency.
📐 The rules
1 · Don't write a verifier — the engine already shipped one. Real parser. Real planner. Real rows.
2 · Assert the property, not a proxy. Execution accuracy, not string similarity.
3 · Schema goes in the prompt, not in the weights. The model learns "read the schema you were handed" — not memorise ours.
⚠️ Limitations
v11 is a research checkpoint. It may still:
- generate incorrect SQL on novel patterns
- misunderstand ambiguous requests
- produce writes with wrong
WHEREclauses — always review before executing
Generated SQL should be reviewed before use in production. This applies doubly to writes.
🔒 Security
Do not rely on model behavior alone for database safety. Production systems should enforce:
- least-privilege database roles
- statement timeouts and row limits
- query validation and schema restrictions
- application-level authorization
- audit logging
- human approval for all write statements
Built by Interchained · ownership at every layer, including the model
3 > 1 — Mark drives, oracle points, Muse builds