What if the next breakthrough in U.S. AI leadership isn’t a $2 billion supercomputer, but a 3-minute download that runs on a spare GPU in your garage?

28-min read

Open source AI models are revolutionizing how enterprises approach artificial intelligence by reducing costs, accelerating innovation, and democratizing advanced capabilities. In today’s competitive landscape, American businesses must leverage these models to stay ahead—here’s how.

What if the next breakthrough in U.S. AI leadership isn’t a $2 billion supercomputer, but a 3-minute download that runs on a spare GPU in your garage? This question, once the domain of science fiction, is now a stark reality at the heart of a global technological and ideological struggle. The dominant paradigm of artificial intelligence, defined by massively expensive, proprietary, closed-source models developed in corporate “ivory towers”, is being fundamentally challenged.¹ A new wave of powerful, low-cost, open-source alternatives is not just offering a different technical path; it is proposing a new philosophy for the future of AI.³

This disruption was catalyzed by an event that can only be described as a “leak” in the dam of proprietary AI. This was not a security breach, but the market-shattering release of DeepSeek-R1, a large language model (LLM) developed in China. This model “leaked” state-of-the-art reasoning capabilities out of the exclusive club of Western tech giants, proving that frontier-level AI could be built for a fraction of the presumed cost.⁴ This development upended the industry’s core assumptions about what it takes to be a leader in artificial intelligence.⁷

This technological shift is unfolding against a backdrop of intense U.S.-China competition, transforming it into a matter of national strategy.⁹ The rapid rise of powerful Chinese open-source models like DeepSeek and Alibaba’s Qwen presents a dual challenge to the United States: a direct threat to its economic leadership and a more subtle battle over the underlying values embedded in our global digital infrastructure.¹⁰ The risk is a future where the world’s most accessible and widely adopted AI tools are shaped by authoritarian censorship and control.¹³ In response, a strategic imperative has emerged, articulated by some as the “American DeepSeek Project”, a call to action for the U.S. to reclaim leadership not just with its formidable proprietary models, but by championing a vibrant, powerful, and truly open-source AI ecosystem.¹⁵

This moment forces a critical re-evaluation of what constitutes a competitive advantage in AI. For years, the prevailing belief was that leadership was a direct function of superior computing power, a belief that underpinned U.S. export controls on high-end chips to China.⁶ Yet, DeepSeek’s success demonstrated that powerful models could be trained on less advanced, export-compliant hardware through novel architectural efficiencies.⁶ This proved that hardware restrictions alone are an insufficient strategy. The new competitive frontier is in software and architecture, creating models that are more efficient to train and run, thereby democratizing access and accelerating innovation.

Furthermore, this new landscape exposes a strategic blind spot in the West’s approach to “openness.” Many so-called “open” models are merely “open-weight,” withholding crucial elements like training data and code that are necessary for true auditing and community-driven development.⁷ A truly open American AI ecosystem must champion a higher standard, one that includes the data, code, logs, and decision-making processes behind a model.¹⁵ Without this level of transparency, the community cannot effectively audit for bias, ensure security, or build upon the work of others in a meaningful way.⁵ This is not just a technical detail; it is a battle for the hearts and minds of developers worldwide, who will inevitably gravitate toward the most transparent and usable ecosystem, regardless of its origin. The future of AI is being written now, and the question is whether it will be an open or a closed book.

The Closed-Source Kingdom and Its Cracks

The contemporary AI landscape has been largely defined by a small number of powerful entities. Tech giants like OpenAI with its o3 and o4 models, Google with Gemini, and Anthropic with Claude have established a kingdom built on closed-source, proprietary technology.¹¹ These models, representing the pinnacle of AI development, are typically accessed not through direct ownership but via controlled Application Programming Interfaces (APIs).³ This structure is underpinned by a clear business model: generating high-margin, recurring API revenue, which creates a powerful incentive for these vendors to maintain a walled-garden ecosystem where they control access, pricing, and the technology’s evolution.²

The “Closed-Source Trap”: Strategic Risks for Business and Nation

While offering polished interfaces and the allure of enterprise-grade solutions, this reliance on a proprietary paradigm creates what can be termed the “closed-source trap”, a series of profound strategic risks for both individual businesses and the nation as a whole.²

• Vendor Lock-in: Companies that build their core products and intellectual property on these closed platforms are essentially building on “rented ground”.² This creates a powerful dependency. If a vendor decides to increase prices, alter service terms, or discontinue a model, the switching costs for an integrated customer can be enormous, limiting strategic flexibility and creating long-term financial vulnerability.²
• Prohibitive and Unsustainable Costs: Accessing these proprietary models at scale is expensive. API usage can quickly escalate into thousands or even millions of dollars per month, creating a significant barrier to entry for startups, small businesses, and researchers.² The emergence of high-performance open-source alternatives, such as Meta’s Llama-3 being cited as roughly 10 times cheaper than GPT-4 for similar performance, highlights the artificially inflated pricing of the closed market.³ This pricing structure is becoming increasingly unsustainable as viable, low-cost alternatives proliferate, signaling an inevitable market correction that threatens the business models of the current incumbents.
• Lack of Transparency and Control: A fundamental characteristic of closed-source models is their opacity. They are effectively “black boxes”.³ Users and even their creators cannot fully inspect the training data, audit the source code, or understand the precise mechanisms behind their decision-making processes.¹⁸ This lack of transparency poses immense challenges for regulatory compliance, security auditing, and the critical work of identifying and mitigating hidden biases.
• Data Security and Privacy Risks: The standard practice of sending sensitive data, be it proprietary corporate information or private customer data, to a third-party API is fraught with risk. Organizations are forced to rely on the vendor’s security protocols and data handling practices, creating a vulnerability to breaches, policy changes, or misuse.³

This concentration of power in a few closed-source champions creates a fragile, top-heavy national AI ecosystem. The U.S. has staked much of its AI leadership on a handful of corporate giants.¹¹ This approach stifles the broader innovation landscape, as startups and researchers are unable to compete at the foundational level.⁴ This stands in stark contrast to the burgeoning, decentralized ecosystem being fostered by competitors. This asymmetry means a single strategic failure at one of America’s tech giants could have an outsized negative impact on the nation’s overall competitiveness, a risk that a more diverse and resilient open-source base would mitigate.

The DeepSeek Disruption: A Crack in the Castle Wall

The formidable walls of the closed-source kingdom were first breached not by a Western competitor, but by DeepSeek-R1. Its release acted as a stunning proof-of-concept that shattered the myth of insurmountable development costs. The model was reportedly trained for a fraction of the cost of its American counterparts, with some estimates as low as $6 million compared to the hundreds of millions spent on models like GPT-4.⁴ This development sent “shock waves” through the industry.⁷

Crucially, this disruption was not merely about cost; it was about performance. DeepSeek-R1 demonstrated capabilities in complex reasoning, mathematics, and coding that were comparable to top-tier proprietary models like OpenAI’s o1.⁶ It proved, unequivocally, that an alternative development path was not only possible but highly competitive, cracking the foundation upon which the closed-source empire was built.

The American Counter-Offensive: Openness as a Strategic Weapon

In the face of this new competitive reality, a powerful counter-narrative is emerging within the United States. It argues that the nation’s most effective response is not to build higher walls around its proprietary technology, but to embrace its own heritage of open innovation and wield it as a strategic weapon.

The “American DeepSeek Project”: A Call for True Openness

This strategic vision has been most clearly articulated as the “American DeepSeek Project,” a concept championed by industry analysts like Nathan Lambert.¹² It calls for a deliberate, well-funded national effort to create a fully open-source American LLM that operates at the frontier of performance. This vision emphasizes a critical distinction that has been blurred in the marketing-driven discourse around AI: the difference between “open-weight” and “fully open.”

An “open-weight” model, which many companies release, provides only the final model parameters. While useful, this is akin to being given a car with a sealed hood. A “fully open” model, by contrast, provides the complete blueprint: the model weights, the training data, the training code, and the documentation.¹⁵ This is the standard of transparency that allows the global community to truly audit, reproduce, understand, and build upon the work. Championing this higher standard of openness is the core of the proposed American strategy.

Why Open Source is a National Security Imperative

Adopting a strategy that champions open-source AI is not merely an alternative path; it is increasingly viewed as a national security imperative, essential for economic competitiveness and the global promotion of democratic values.¹⁰ The benefits are multi-faceted:

• Accelerated Innovation: Open, collaborative development environments have consistently proven to out-innovate closed, siloed ones. By allowing a global community of developers and researchers to build upon a common foundation, problems are solved faster, and new applications emerge at a pace that proprietary teams cannot match.³
• Enhanced Security and Trust: Transparency is the bedrock of security. When code and data are open to public scrutiny, a vast community can work to identify and patch security vulnerabilities, hidden backdoors, and harmful biases far more effectively than any single corporate entity.⁵ This open process builds public trust in the technology.
• Broad-Based Economic Growth: Open-source AI democratizes access to powerful tools, empowering startups, small businesses, and academic institutions. This fosters a more dynamic, resilient, and competitive economy.⁵ A study commissioned by Meta and conducted by the Linux Foundation found that smaller businesses, the engines of innovation, adopt open-source AI at higher rates than larger corporations, citing significant cost savings and agility.²⁵
• Countering Authoritarian Influence: The most effective defense against the global proliferation of AI models embedded with authoritarian values is a good offense. By providing a powerful, low-cost, and unbiased American open-source alternative, the U.S. can capture the allegiance of the global developer community, ensuring that the world’s digital infrastructure is built on a foundation of democratic principles, not censorship and state control.¹⁰

This strategic approach can be seen as a form of “open-source diplomacy”.²⁷ History has shown that the widespread adoption of a technology platform often leads to alignment with the values and standards of its country of origin, as seen in the rivalries between Windows and Linux, or iOS and Android.⁸ If the U.S. were to retreat from open-source AI, other nations would be forced to either develop their own ecosystems or, more likely, adopt Chinese alternatives, leading to a “decoupling” from American technology and influence.²⁷ By actively promoting and funding a U.S.-led open-source ecosystem, America can use its technology as a form of soft power, setting global standards and empowering the world’s developers with tools that reflect its values.¹⁰

Case Study – The Imperfect Pioneer: Perplexity’s R1-1776

An early, real-world example of this American counter-offensive is Perplexity AI’s R1-1776 model. It was conceived as a direct, values-driven response to the challenge posed by DeepSeek-R1.¹³ Recognizing that the Chinese model came with significant censorship aligned with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) directives, Perplexity embarked on a project to “de-censor” it.¹³

The technical process was ambitious. The team identified approximately 300 topics that were censored by the original model. They then constructed a dataset of 40,000 multilingual prompts designed to elicit responses on these sensitive subjects. Using Nvidia’s NeMo framework, they post-trained the original DeepSeek-R1 model on this new dataset with the explicit goal of removing the bias while preserving its formidable reasoning capabilities.¹³

The results of this experiment were complex and illuminating. Perplexity’s internal evaluations showed that the model’s core reasoning and math abilities remained intact, performing on par with the base R1 model on key academic benchmarks.¹⁴ However, the reception from the open-source community was mixed. Some independent testers reported a significant degradation in performance on very complex reasoning problems, with one user on the popular forum r/LocalLLaMA ranking R1-1776 far below the original DeepSeek-R1.³⁰ Conversely, other statistical tests found no significant difference in logical reasoning performance between the two models.³¹

This discrepancy highlights a crucial lesson. The R1-1776 experiment reveals that the competition is no longer just about raw performance scores but also about the alignment and values embedded within the models. The challenge showed that simply “removing” censorship is a non-trivial technical problem that can have unintended consequences on a model’s capabilities. The censorship is not a simple switch to be flipped; it is an emergent property of the model’s training. This suggests that the true frontier for American AI leadership lies in solving a much harder problem: how to build models from the ground up that are both exceptionally powerful and inherently aligned with democratic principles of free and open inquiry, without the performance trade-offs seen in post-hoc interventions.

The Engine of Democratization: How New Architectures Are Slashing Costs

The revolution in open-source AI is not just a philosophical one; it is being driven by profound architectural innovations that allow models to be simultaneously massive in capacity and remarkably efficient in execution. This is the technical “how” behind the democratization of AI, shifting the focus from brute-force computation to elegant and efficient design.

Demystifying Mixture-of-Experts (MoE)

At the forefront of this shift is the Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture. In simple terms, an MoE model operates not as a single, monolithic brain but as a “team of specialists”.³³ Within the model, a component known as a “gating network” or “router” acts as a manager, intelligently directing each part of an incoming query to the most relevant “expert” sub-network for processing.³³

A prime example of this in action is Mistral’s Mixtral 8x7B model. Within each layer of this model, there are eight distinct expert networks. However, for any given piece of information (a token) being processed, the gating network activates only two of those eight experts.³⁷ This principle is called conditional computation.

The key benefit of this approach is a dramatic decoupling of a model’s total size from its operational cost. MoE allows a model to have an enormous total parameter count (for Mixtral, this is around 47 billion parameters), which contributes to its knowledge and capacity. However, the active parameter count, the number of parameters actually used for any single computation, is much smaller (only 13 billion for Mixtral). This results in a massive reduction in the computational resources required for inference, making the model significantly faster and cheaper to run than a dense model of comparable size.³⁴

The Next Leap – Assembly-of-Experts (AoE): A New Form of AI Alchemy

Building on the modularity of MoE, an even more radical technique has emerged: Assembly-of-Experts (AoE). It is critical to clarify that this term, in the context of AI, has absolutely no connection to the Iranian political body of the same name, a point of potential confusion that requires explicit distinction.³⁸

AoE is a revolutionary construction method for creating new models, not a runtime architecture. It can be thought of as performing “model surgery” or creating “AI chimeras”.⁴³ Instead of the costly and time-consuming process of training a model from scratch or fine-tuning it with gradient-based methods, AoE assembles a new “child” model by merging the parameters of multiple existing “parent” models. This process, which can be done in linear time, disrupts the entire paradigm of AI development.⁴³

This technique signals a major shift in the industry, moving from a primary focus on foundational research (training models from scratch) to a new discipline that could be described as “AI manufacturing” (assembling novel models from existing, high-quality components). Historically, creating a state-of-the-art model required a massive research lab and access to a supercomputer.⁴⁶ AoE demonstrates that a small, skilled team can now “manufacture” a world-class model by understanding how to select and combine the right pre-existing parts. This democratizes not just the use of AI, but the very creation of new and powerful AI systems, fundamentally altering the industrial landscape.

Case Study – The Apex of Efficiency: TNG’s R1T2 Chimera

The most compelling demonstration of AoE’s power to date is the DeepSeek-TNG R1T2 Chimera model. Tellingly, this breakthrough did not come from a Silicon Valley giant, but from TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, a German IT consulting firm, underscoring the democratizing nature of the technique.⁴⁸

The R1T2 Chimera has a “Tri-Mind” construction, created by meticulously merging desirable traits from three different DeepSeek parent models, R1-0528, R1, and V3-0324, at the level of their fundamental weight tensors.⁵⁴ The results are nothing short of staggering:

• Performance: The assembled Chimera model achieves 90-92% of the advanced reasoning performance of its smartest and most resource-intensive parent, R1-0528.⁴⁴
• Efficiency: It is over 200% faster than R1-0528 and generates its responses using 60% fewer tokens. This drastically reduces inference costs and latency, making high-level AI economically viable for a much broader range of applications.⁴⁴
• Accessibility: By delivering elite performance with such high efficiency, the Chimera model fulfills the promise of running state-of-the-art AI on lower-cost and more widely available hardware, a key step toward true democratization.⁶⁰

This new methodology creates a virtuous cycle that inherently favors an open ecosystem. The effectiveness of AoE is directly proportional to the size and diversity of the “gene pool” of high-quality parent models available for merging. An open-source landscape, where different teams and companies like Meta, Mistral, and DeepSeek all contribute models, naturally creates this rich library of building blocks. A closed-source ecosystem, by definition, cannot participate in this collaborative innovation. This creates a powerful network effect, where each new open-source release strengthens the entire ecosystem and accelerates its collective rate of progress beyond what closed systems can achieve.

Table 1: The New Guard vs. The Old Guard: A Tale of Two AIs

The following table distills the complex technical and strategic shifts into a clear comparison, illustrating the paradigm shift from the closed, expensive models of the past to the open, efficient models of the future.

Feature	The Old Guard (Proprietary)	The First Wave (Open-Weight)	The New Guard (Assembled Open-Source)
Example	OpenAI o3 / Google Gemini	DeepSeek-R1	TNG R1T2 Chimera
Architecture	Dense / Closed MoE	Open-Weight MoE	Assembly-of-Experts (AoE)
Access	Proprietary API 18	Open Weights 7	Fully Open (MIT License) 44
Cost Model	High-cost, pay-per-token 3	Low training cost, free weights 8	Near-zero creation cost, ultra-low inference cost 57
Key Strength	Cutting-edge performance, polish 64	Democratized access to reasoning 4	Unprecedented performance-per-watt; efficiency 44
Key Weakness	Vendor lock-in, no transparency 2	Potential for embedded bias/censorship 13	Relies on existing parent models 43
Customizability	Very Limited 19	High (fine-tuning possible) 3	Extreme (merging, assembly) 43

What Went Wrong and The Path Forward for American AI

The rise of powerful, efficient, and open-source models from international competitors begs a critical question: How did the United States, the undisputed leader in AI research and development, find itself playing catch-up in the open-source arena?

Analyzing the Strategic Misstep

The answer lies not in a failure of technological capability, but in a failure of strategic vision. The U.S. AI ecosystem, driven by the commercial incentives of its largest players, pursued a strategy of over-concentration on proprietary, closed-source models.² The focus was on building walled gardens, protecting intellectual property, and monetizing access through APIs. While this was a logical path for individual companies seeking to maximize revenue, it created a strategic vacuum at the national level.¹⁰

This approach effectively ceded the fertile ground of open-source, the global, collaborative space where developers learn, experiment, and build the next generation of technology, to its competitors. The U.S. government and private sector largely failed to recognize open-source not merely as a software distribution model, but as a critical instrument of geopolitical influence, ecosystem dominance, and long-term innovation.⁹

This has led to a common but dangerously flawed argument against open-source: the risk of misuse by malicious actors.²⁴ While this risk is real, it ignores the new strategic reality. The choice is no longer

whether powerful open-source AI will exist; it already does, and models from competitors are proliferating globally.¹⁰ The real choice is

who will set the standards for this technology. A world dominated by foreign open-source models, potentially containing hidden backdoors or built on authoritarian values, is far more dangerous to U.S. interests than a world with a strong, transparent, and American-led open-source presence.⁹ Attempting to suppress open-source in the name of security is a counter-productive strategy that would cede the entire field to adversaries, leaving the U.S. with no influence. The best defense is to lead.

The Path to Reclaiming Leadership

The path forward for the United States is not to abandon its successful proprietary models, which will continue to push the absolute frontier of AI capabilities. Rather, the solution is a robust, dual-pronged strategy that aggressively champions a truly open American ecosystem alongside them.¹⁰

This requires a fundamental shift in both public policy and private investment. The focus must move beyond simply funding basic research to actively supporting the core infrastructure of open-source AI: creating and maintaining large-scale public datasets, developing open training and auditing tools, and establishing transparent benchmarking standards.¹⁵ The U.S. government can and should act as a catalyst, fostering public-private partnerships between industry, academia, and the global open-source community with the explicit goal of building the “American DeepSeek”, a beacon of transparent, democratic, and powerful AI.⁴

Ultimately, the metric for AI leadership is changing. It is no longer about the parameter count of a single flagship model or the market capitalization of one company. The true measure of a nation’s strength in the AI era will be the vibrancy, diversity, and rate of innovation within the entire technological ecosystem it fosters. Techniques like Assembly-of-Experts are leading indicators of this shift; they are inherently ecosystem-native technologies that thrive on openness and collaboration. The United States, with its deep cultural roots in garage tinkering, open innovation, and decentralized community building, is uniquely positioned to win this new race, if it chooses to compete on this field. The strategic misstep was not in lacking the ability, but in failing to recognize that this is the primary field of competition.

Conclusion: Your Role in Building an Open AI Future

The power to define the future of artificial intelligence is undergoing a radical and irreversible decentralization. It is shifting from a few exclusive boardrooms in Silicon Valley to the global community of developers, researchers, entrepreneurs, and builders. The release of disruptive models like DeepSeek-R1 and the invention of revolutionary techniques like Assembly-of-Experts have shattered the economic and computational barriers that once protected the old guard. The tools for innovation are becoming accessible to all.

This profound shift presents both an immense opportunity and a stark choice for the United States and its allies. The nation can continue to focus its efforts on perfecting its walled gardens, watching from the ramparts as the rest of the world builds a new digital future on a foundation laid by others. Or, it can embrace its foundational heritage of open innovation and lead the global charge in building a democratic, transparent, and accessible AI ecosystem for the benefit of all.

The tools to build the next generation of AI are becoming accessible to everyone. The question is no longer if we can build a powerful, open, and American-aligned AI ecosystem, but if we have the will to do so. What role will you play in this new, open frontier? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Works cited

1. Democratizing AI – IBM, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.ibm.com/think/insights/democratizing-ai
2. The Closed-Source Trap: Why Most Companies Will Regret Their …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/@curiouser.ai/the-closed-source-trap-why-most-companies-will-regret-their-generative-ai-strategy-209af52c04be
3. Open-Source LLMs vs Closed: Unbiased Guide for Innovative Companies [2025], accessed July 14, 2025, https://hatchworks.com/blog/gen-ai/open-source-vs-closed-llms-guide/
4. The Democratization of AI: A Pivotal Moment for Innovation and …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://verdict.justia.com/2025/02/24/the-democratization-of-ai-a-pivotal-moment-for-innovation-and-regulation
5. Why open source is critical to the future of AI – Red Hat, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/why-open-source-critical-future-ai
6. Nvidia: Behind DeepSeek’s ‘Excellent AI Advancement’ | Technology Magazine, accessed July 14, 2025, https://technologymagazine.com/articles/nvidia-deepseek-excellent-ai-advancement
7. DeepSeek – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepSeek
8. AI Gold Rush: Who Wins the Battle for Compute, Capital and Open …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.wisdomtree.com/investments/blog/2025/02/18/ai-gold-rush-who-wins-the-battle-for-compute-capital-and-open-source-dominance
9. U.S. Open-Source AI Governance | Center for AI Policy | CAIP, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.centeraipolicy.org/work/us-open-source-ai-governance
10. The Importance of US Leadership in Open-Source AI Development – The National Interest, accessed July 14, 2025, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/techland/the-importance-of-us-leadership-in-open-source-ai-development
11. ICYMI: The Importance of US Leadership in Open-Source AI Development, accessed July 14, 2025, https://americanedgeproject.org/icymi-the-importance-of-us-leadership-in-open-source-ai-development/
12. Interconnects | Nathan Lambert | Substack, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.interconnects.ai/
13. Perplexity’s R1 1776 Matches DeepSeek-R1’s Performance – Without the Censorship, accessed July 14, 2025, https://hyperight.com/perplexity-r1-1776-matches-deepseek-r1-performance-without-the-censorship/
14. Open-sourcing R1 1776 – Perplexity, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.perplexity.ai/hub/blog/open-sourcing-r1-1776
15. Interconnects – Apple Podcasts, accessed July 14, 2025, https://podcasts.apple.com/zw/podcast/interconnects/id1719552353
16. Sustaining U.S. AI Leadership: Moving Beyond Restrictions – AAF, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/sustaining-u-s-ai-leadership-moving-beyond-restrictions/
17. The Power Of Open Collaboration: How Open Source Is Shaping The Future Of AI – Forbes, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2025/01/03/the-power-of-open-collaboration-how-open-source-is-shaping-the-future-of-ai/
18. What’s better? Open-source versus closed-source AI. | Aquent, accessed July 14, 2025, https://aquent.com/blog/whats-better-open-source-versus-closed-source-ai
19. How to Choose Between Open Source and Closed Source LLMs: A 2024 Guide – Arcee AI, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.arcee.ai/blog/how-to-choose-between-open-source-and-closed-source-llms-a-2024-guide
20. Open-Source AI vs. Closed-Source AI: What’s the Difference? – Multimodal, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.multimodal.dev/post/open-source-ai-vs-closed-source-ai
21. AI and Geopolitics: How Might AI Affect the Rise and Fall of Nations? | RAND, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA3034-1.html
22. Open-Source AI is a National Security Imperative – Third Way, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.thirdway.org/report/open-source-ai-is-a-national-security-imperative
23. Open Source AI as a Competitive Advantage | by Mark Craddock – Medium, accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/@mcraddock/open-source-ai-as-a-competitive-advantage-45d59a159085
24. Export Controls on Open-Source Models Will Not Win the AI Race – Just Security, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.justsecurity.org/108144/blanket-bans-software-exports-not-solution-ai-arms-race/
25. New Study Shows Open Source AI Is Catalyst for Economic Growth – About Meta, accessed July 14, 2025, https://about.fb.com/news/2025/05/new-study-shows-open-source-ai-catalyst-economic-growth/
26. The Impact of AI on Small Businesses | by Collins Snr. – Medium, accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/@otollocolly/the-impact-of-ai-on-small-businesses-9ee9b65dc2dc
27. US leadership in AI requires open-source diplomacy | Berkman Klein Center, accessed July 14, 2025, https://cyber.harvard.edu/story/2025-01/us-leadership-ai-requires-open-source-diplomacy
28. perplexity-ai/r1-1776 – Hugging Face, accessed July 14, 2025, https://huggingface.co/perplexity-ai/r1-1776
29. Uncensored DeepSeek-R1 : Perplexity-ai R1–1776 | by Mehul Gupta | Data Science in Your Pocket | Medium, accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/data-science-in-your-pocket/uncensored-deepseek-r1-perplexity-ai-r1-1776-cc80454afa03
30. Perplexity R1 1776 performs worse than DeepSeek R1 for complex problems. – Reddit, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1izbmbb/perplexity_r1_1776_performs_worse_than_deepseek/
31. Is there a statistically significant difference in logical reasoning performance between DeepSeek R1 and Perplexity R1 1776? : r/LocalLLaMA – Reddit, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1j49sbd/is_there_a_statistically_significant_difference/
32. perplexity-ai/r1-1776 · This model performs worse in complex problems compared to the DeepSeek R1 – Hugging Face, accessed July 14, 2025, https://huggingface.co/perplexity-ai/r1-1776/discussions/254
33. What Is Mixture of Experts (MoE)? How It Works, Use Cases & More | DataCamp, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.datacamp.com/blog/mixture-of-experts-moe
34. Mixture of Experts LLMs: Key Concepts Explained – neptune.ai, accessed July 14, 2025, https://neptune.ai/blog/mixture-of-experts-llms
35. Mixture of experts – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixture_of_experts
36. Understanding Mixture of Experts – AI with Armand, accessed July 14, 2025, https://newsletter.armand.so/p/understanding-mixture-experts
37. What is mixture of experts? | IBM, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/mixture-of-experts
38. Assembly of Experts – Wikipedia, accessed July 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assembly_of_Experts
39. Assembly of Experts (Iran) | Role, Powers, Function, & Election | Britannica, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Assembly-of-Experts
40. Understanding Iran’s Assembly of Experts Vote | The Washington Institute, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/understanding-irans-assembly-experts-vote
41. Moving to a post-Khamenei era: The role of the Assembly of Experts | Middle East Institute, accessed July 14, 2025, https://mei.edu/publications/moving-post-khamenei-era-role-assembly-experts
42. Everything you need to know about Iran’s Assembly of Experts election | Brookings, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/everything-you-need-to-know-about-irans-assembly-of-experts-election/
43. Assembly of Experts: Linear-time construction of the Chimera LLM variants with emergent and adaptable behaviors – arXiv, accessed July 14, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2506.14794v1
44. DeepSeek R1T2 Chimera: 200% Faster Than R1-0528 With Improved Reasoning and Compact Output – MarkTechPost, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.marktechpost.com/2025/07/03/deepseek-r1t2-chimera-200-faster-than-r1-0528-with-improved-reasoning-and-compact-output/
45. New DeepSeek “Chimera” SHOCKED Experts 2X Faster and Smarter Than Original … – YouTube, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEKgZ-cGDYI
46. Assembly of Experts: Linear-time construction of the Chimera … – arXiv, accessed July 14, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.14794
47. [2502.08145] Democratizing AI: Open-source Scalable LLM Training on GPU-based Supercomputers – arXiv, accessed July 14, 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08145
48. Release of DeepSeek-TNG R1T2 Chimera – TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.tngtech.com/en/about-us/news/release-of-deepseek-tng-r1t2-chimera/
49. Article: What is DeepSeek-R1? – TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.tngtech.com/en/about-us/news/article-what-is-deepseek-r1/
50. TNG Technology Consulting GmbH – GitHub, accessed July 14, 2025, https://github.com/TNG
51. The US TikTok Sale Might Actually Happen – DTNSB 5054 – Daily Tech News Show, accessed July 14, 2025, https://dailytechnewsshow.com/2025/07/07/the-us-tiktok-sale-might-actually-happen-dtnsb-5054/
52. Breakthrough AI: TNG Technology Unveils 200% Faster DeepSeek R1-0528 Variant, accessed July 14, 2025, https://onderwijs.beamstart.com/news/holy-smokes-a-new-200-17515497197491
53. TNG Technology Consulting GmbH: “Discover DeepSeek-R1, its capabilities & its potential! #AI #DeepSeekR1 In our new article, our colleague Jonas Mayer shares insights on this groundbreaking LLM: www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-d…” — Bluesky, accessed July 14, 2025, https://bsky.app/profile/tngtech.com/post/3lhj6jnx5lk2b
54. DeepSeek R1T2 Chimera (free) – API, Providers, Stats | OpenRouter, accessed July 14, 2025, https://openrouter.ai/tngtech/deepseek-r1t2-chimera:free
55. unsloth/DeepSeek-TNG-R1T2-Chimera – Hugging Face, accessed July 14, 2025, https://huggingface.co/unsloth/DeepSeek-TNG-R1T2-Chimera
56. tngtech/DeepSeek-TNG-R1T2-Chimera – Hugging Face, accessed July 14, 2025, https://huggingface.co/tngtech/DeepSeek-TNG-R1T2-Chimera
57. The DeepSeek R1T2 Chimera Secret: How One German Company Just Broke AI Forever | by Julian Goldie | Jul, 2025 | Medium, accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/@julian.goldie/the-deepseek-r1t2-chimera-secret-how-one-german-company-just-broke-ai-forever-6bb7a9888727
58. Faster Not Bigger: New R1T2 LLM Combines DeepSeek Versions – GovInfoSecurity, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.govinfosecurity.com/faster-bigger-new-r1t2-llm-combines-deepseek-versions-a-28901
59. HOLY SMOKES! A new, 200% faster DeepSeek R1-0528 variant …, accessed July 14, 2025, https://app.daily.dev/posts/holy-smokes-a-new-200-faster-deepseek-r1-0528-variant-appears-from-german-lab-tng-technology-cons-novcaaibj
60. DeepSeek R1 Hardware Requirements Explained – YouTube, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RhPZgDoglE&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD
61. How to Run DeepSeek Locally – Pinggy, accessed July 14, 2025, https://pinggy.io/blog/run_deepseek_locally/
62. DeepSeek-R1T2-Chimera Explained: What It Is & Why It’s So Fast! – YouTube, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLBV6GQl8Hg
63. DeepSeek R1 Hardware Requirements | Explained – YouTube, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASpGHOV6LEQ
64. Open-Source vs Proprietary AI Models: Choosing the Right Solution 2024 | Pragmatyc, accessed July 14, 2025, https://pragmatyc.com/article/open-source-and-proprietary-ai-models-2024
65. Open-Source vs Closed-Source AI Foundation Models: Striking the Balance | by Paul E., accessed July 14, 2025, https://medium.com/@paul.ekwere/open-source-vs-closed-source-ai-foundation-models-fd6829864fa5
66. Defense Priorities in the Open-Source AI Debate – CSIS, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.csis.org/analysis/defense-priorities-open-source-ai-debate
67. AI Guide for Government – AI CoE – IT Modernization Centers of Excellence, accessed July 14, 2025, https://coe.gsa.gov/coe/ai-guide-for-government/print-all/index.html
68. A Strategic Vision for US AI Leadership: Supporting Security, Innovation, Democracy and Global Prosperity | Wilson Center, accessed July 14, 2025, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/strategic-vision-us-ai-leadership-supporting-security-innovation-democracy-and-global
69. https://sheridantech.io/