There seem to be some critical complexity thresholds that must be met to achieve various types of emergent complexity. Just looking at Gemma 4 alone, going from E2B to E4B to 12B just seems to get confused a bit less and know a bit more. Then somehow, going to 26B-A4B gains a very clear ability to hold more complex associations and concepts in mind. 31B is better still, and enough so that I almost want to classify 26B-A4B with the toy models (E2B, E4B, 12B), but letting 26B-A4B do a lot of reasoning seems to help considerably. 26BB-A4B with Medium reasoning effort competes with 31B using no reasoning at all. However, 31B with reasoning enabled just seems qualitatively different again. It's no longer just a stochastic parrot and a knowledge base, but it actually seems to be able to work through many problems with multiple steps, where the best 26B-A4B can do is recite what the steps of the solution are. Just like an engine, there is no substitute for displacement (or parameters in this case) but you can bolt on turbos and the like to get around *some* of the shortcomings of a smaller cylinder such that it becomes less obvious.