Context-Aware Assistant Selection for Improved Inference Acceleration with Large Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their widespread adoption, large language models (LLMs) remain prohibitive to use under resource constraints, with their ever growing sizes only increasing the barrier for use. One particular issue stems from the high latency associated with auto-regressive generation in LLMs, rendering the largest LLMs difficult to use without advanced computing infrastructure. Assisted decoding, where a smaller draft model guides a larger expert model's generation, has helped alleviate this concern, but remains dependent on alignment between the two models. Thus if the draft model is insufficiently capable on some domain of interest relative to the target model, performance can degrade. Alternatively, one can leverage multiple draft models to better cover the expertise of the target, but when multiple black-box draft models are available, selecting an assistant without details about its construction can be difficult. To better understand this decision making problem, we observe it as a contextual bandit, where a policy must choose a draft model based on a context. We show that even without prior knowledge of the draft models, creating an offline dataset from only outputs of independent draft/target models and training a policy over the alignment of these outputs can accelerate performance on multiple domains as long as an individual draft model is effective. We observe these results hold on various settings with multiple assisted decoding candidates, highlighting its flexibility and the advantageous role that such decision making can play.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".