Home / Granite Guardian

Granite Guardian

An open judge model for LLM agents. Give it a conversation and a criterion; it returns a verdict and a probability. I lead the team and own its releases, from data to open weights: five versions in eighteen months, shipped in watsonx and Red Hat’s Ask Red Hat.

Try the demoModel cardNAACL 2025 paperGitHub

Artificial Analysis guardrail benchmark, and first among models that take their policy at runtime
5th of 20
per check on that benchmark, in no-think mode
59 ms
places on GuardBench, across 40 datasets
6 of top 10
downloads: 1.16M on Hugging Face, 371K on Ollama
1.5M

Independent evaluation

On the leaderboards, and live

Artificial Analysis bar chart of average F1 for guardrail models. Granite Guardian 4.1 8B is the fifth bar at 85.9%.
Fifth of 20 by F1 (0.859), within 0.03 of the leader, with one broad policy written by Artificial Analysis. June 2026.Artificial Analysis ↗
The Granite Guardian demo on Hugging Face, with a custom criterion for personal data entered in the setup panel.
The hosted demo: pick a use case or write your own criterion, and see the verdict and its reasoning.Hugging Face Space ↗

Releases

Five versions in eighteen months

  1. Oct 20243.0 Harm and RAG-hallucination detection, at 2B and 8B
  2. Dec 20243.1 Function-call hallucination detection for agents
  3. Feb 20253.2 Smaller 5B and 3B variants
  4. 20253.3 Hybrid thinking: a reasoning trace or a direct verdict
  5. Apr 20264.1 User-written criteria, and use as a reward model

What 4.1 added over 3.3

Balanced accuracy, 8B, no-think mode. Source: the 4.1 model card.

  • Guardian 3.3
  • Guardian 4.1
  • IFEval multi-constraint0.4580.844
  • InfoBench, human-annotated0.5350.706
  • InfoBench, GPT-4-annotated0.5850.726
  • FC Reward Bench0.740.79
  • LLM-AggreFact average0.761 → 0.760

70.3

Best-of-N score on the verifiable JETTS tasks as a reward model, ahead of Skywork-Reward 27B (68.7) and SFR-Judge 70B (68.2).

0.57 → 0.84

IFEval balanced accuracy: the base Granite 4.1 8B prompted as a judge, then post-trained as Guardian.

Design

Three decisions

  1. 01

    A judge, not a classifier

    It answers with a yes/no token and its probability, so the whole language model stays in play. That is what later let it take new criteria and serve as a reward model.

  2. 02

    Criteria at runtime

    Since 4.1 the user writes the rule. Out-of-distribution safety F1 slipped from 0.81 to 0.79; custom-criteria accuracy on IFEval went from 0.46 to 0.84.

  3. 03

    Reasoning from the same weights

    Think mode writes a justification first. It costs 59 ms to 1.3 s and pays back in tuning custom criteria and debugging verdicts.

Adoption

In products, open source and other people’s studies

“Granite-Guardian-3.2-5B showed the best generalization with only a 6.5% gap.”
R. J. Young, independent robustness study of ten guardrail models, 2025
“IBM’s open-source safety models provide harm detection, jailbreak detection, topic control, hallucination detection, and RAG quality assessment, capabilities that other guard providers don’t yet offer.”
Traefik Labs, on adding Granite Guardian to Traefik Hub, March 2026

The same post-training recipe adds capabilities to Granite models, composed by Granite Switch.