Accelerating MoE Model Inference with Expert Sharding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mixture of experts (MoE) models achieve state-of-the-art results in language modeling but suffer from inefficient hardware utilization due to imbalanced token routing and communication overhead. While prior work has focused on optimizing MoE training and decoder architectures, inference for encoder-based MoE models in a multi-GPU with expert parallelism setting remains underexplored. We introduce MoEShard, an inference system that achieves perfect load balancing through tensor sharding of MoE experts. Unlike existing approaches that rely on heuristic capacity factors or drop tokens, MoEShard evenly distributes computation across GPUs and ensures full token retention, maximizing utilization regardless of routing skewness. We achieve this through a strategic row- and column-wise decomposition of expert matrices. This reduces idle time and avoids bottlenecks caused by imbalanced expert assignments. Furthermore, MoEShard minimizes kernel launches by fusing decomposed expert computations, further improving throughput. We evaluate MoEShard against DeepSpeed on encoder-based architectures, demonstrating speedups of up to 6.4× in time to first token (TTFT). Our results show that when properly applied to experts, tensor sharding is a viable and effective strategy for efficient MoE inference.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".