Nowadays, many companies possess various types of AI accelerators, forming heterogeneous clusters. Efficiently leveraging these clusters for high-throughput large language model (LLM) inference services can significantly reduce costs and expedite task processing. However, LLM inference on heterogeneous clusters presents two main challenges. Firstly, different deployment configurations can result in vastly different performance. The number of possible configurations is large, and evaluating the effectiveness of a specific setup is complex. Thus, finding an optimal configuration is not an easy task. Secondly, LLM inference instances within a heterogeneous cluster possess varying processing capacities, leading to different processing speeds for handling inference requests. Evaluating these capacities and designing a request scheduling algorithm that fully maximizes the potential of each instance is challenging. In this paper, we propose a high-throughput inference service system on heterogeneous clusters. First, the deployment configuration is optimized by modeling the resource amount and expected throughput and using the exhaustive search method. Second, a novel mechanism is proposed to schedule requests among instances, which fully considers the different processing capabilities of various instances. Extensive experiments show that the proposed scheduler improves throughput by 122.5% and 33.6% on two heterogeneous clusters, respectively.

The conventional cloud-based large model learning framework is increasingly constrained by latency, cost, personalization, and privacy concerns. In this survey, we explore an emerging paradigm: collaborative learning between on-device small model and cloud-based large model, which promises low-latency, cost-efficient, and personalized intelligent services while preserving user privacy. We provide a comprehensive review across hardware, system, algorithm, and application layers. At each layer, we summarize key problems and recent advances from both academia and industry. In particular, we categorize collaboration algorithms into data-based, feature-based, and parameter-based frameworks. We also review publicly available datasets and evaluation metrics with user-level or device-level consideration tailored to collaborative learning settings. We further highlight real-world deployments, ranging from recommender systems and mobile livestreaming to personal intelligent assistants. We finally point out open research directions to guide future development in this rapidly evolving field.

The mixture of experts (MoE) model is a sparse variant of large language models (LLMs), designed to hold a better balance between intelligent capability and computational overhead. Despite its benefits, MoE is still too expensive to deploy on resource-constrained edge devices, especially with the demands of on-device inference services. Recent research efforts often apply model compression techniques, such as quantization, pruning and merging, to restrict MoE complexity. Unfortunately, due to their predefined static model optimization strategies, they cannot always achieve the desired quality-overhead trade-off when handling multiple requests, finally degrading the on-device quality of service. These limitations motivate us to propose the D$^2$MoE, an algorithm-system co-design framework that matches diverse task requirements by dynamically allocating the most proper bit-width to each expert. Specifically, inspired by the nested structure of matryoshka dolls, we propose the matryoshka weight quantization (MWQ) to progressively compress expert weights in a bit-nested manner and reduce the required runtime memory. On top of it, we further optimize the I/O-computation pipeline and design a heuristic scheduling algorithm following our hottest-expert-bit-first (HEBF) principle, which maximizes the expert parallelism between I/O and computation queue under constrained memory budgets, thus significantly reducing the idle temporal bubbles waiting for the experts to load. Evaluations on real edge devices show that D$^2$MoE improves the overall inference throughput by up to 1.39$\times$ and reduces the peak memory footprint by up to 53% over the latest on-device inference frameworks, while still preserving comparable serving accuracy as its INT8 counterparts.

This paper presents an approach to automating JUnit test generation for Java applications using the Spring Boot framework, leveraging the LLaMA (Large Language Model Architecture) model to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of the testing process. The resulting tool, called CUBETESTERAI, includes a user-friendly web interface and the integration of a CI/CD pipeline using GitLab and Docker. These components streamline the automated test generation process, allowing developers to generate JUnit tests directly from their code snippets with minimal manual intervention. The final implementation executes the LLaMA models through RunPod, an online GPU service, which also enhances the privacy of our tool. Using the advanced natural language processing capabilities of the LLaMA model, CUBETESTERAI is able to generate test cases that provide high code coverage and accurate validation of software functionalities in Java-based Spring Boot applications. Furthermore, it efficiently manages resource-intensive operations and refines the generated tests to address common issues like missing imports and handling of private methods. By comparing CUBETESTERAI with some state-of-the-art tools, we show that our proposal consistently demonstrates competitive and, in many cases, better performance in terms of code coverage in different real-life Java programs.

Current Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in general reasoning yet struggle with specialized tasks requiring proprietary or domain-specific knowledge. Fine-tuning large models for every niche application is often infeasible due to black-box constraints and high computational overhead. To address this, we propose a collaborative framework that pairs a specialized weak model with a general strong model. The weak model, tailored to specific domains, produces initial drafts and background information, while the strong model leverages its advanced reasoning to refine these drafts, extending LLMs' capabilities to critical yet specialized tasks. To optimize this collaboration, we introduce a collaborative feedback to fine-tunes the weak model, which quantifies the influence of the weak model's contributions in the collaboration procedure and establishes preference pairs to guide preference tuning of the weak model. We validate our framework through experiments on three domains. We find that the collaboration significantly outperforms each model alone by leveraging complementary strengths. Moreover, aligning the weak model with the collaborative preference further enhances overall performance.

The human-level performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various tasks has raised expectations for the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to possess emotions someday. To explore the capability of current LLMs to express emotions in their outputs, we conducted an experiment using several LLMs (OpenAI GPT, Google Gemini, Meta Llama3, and Cohere Command R+) to role-play as agents answering questions with specified emotional states. We defined the emotional states using Russell's Circumplex model, a well-established framework that characterizes emotions along the sleepy-activated (arousal) and pleasure-displeasure (valence) axes. We chose this model for its simplicity, utilizing two continuous parameters, which allows for better controllability in applications involving continuous changes in emotional states. The responses generated were evaluated using a sentiment analysis model, independent of the LLMs, trained on the GoEmotions dataset. The evaluation showed that the emotional states of the generated answers were consistent with the specifications, demonstrating the LLMs' capability for emotional expression. This indicates the potential for LLM-based AI agents to simulate emotions, opening up a wide range of applications for emotion-based interactions, such as advisors or consultants who can provide advice or opinions with a personal touch.

Recent advances of reasoning models, exemplified by OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek's R1, highlight the significant potential of Reinforcement Learning (RL) to enhance the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, replicating these advancements across diverse domains remains challenging due to limited methodological transparency. In this work, we present two-Staged history-Resampling Policy Optimization (SRPO), which surpasses the performance of DeepSeek-R1-Zero-32B on the AIME24 and LiveCodeBench benchmarks. SRPO achieves this using the same base model as DeepSeek (i.e. Qwen2.5-32B), using only about 1/10 of the training steps required by DeepSeek-R1-Zero-32B, demonstrating superior efficiency. Building upon Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), we introduce two key methodological innovations: (1) a two-stage cross-domain training paradigm designed to balance the development of mathematical reasoning and coding proficiency, and (2) History Resampling (HR), a technique to address ineffective samples. Our comprehensive experiments validate the effectiveness of our approach, offering valuable insights into scaling LLM reasoning capabilities across diverse tasks.

In this paper, an approach for concept extraction from documents using pre-trained large language models (LLMs) is presented. Compared with conventional methods that extract keyphrases summarizing the important information discussed in a document, our approach tackles a more challenging task of extracting all present concepts related to the specific domain, not just the important ones. Through comprehensive evaluations of two widely used benchmark datasets, we demonstrate that our method improves the F1 score compared to state-of-the-art techniques. Additionally, we explore the potential of using prompts within these models for unsupervised concept extraction. The extracted concepts are intended to support domain coverage evaluation of ontologies and facilitate ontology learning, highlighting the effectiveness of LLMs in concept extraction tasks. Our source code and datasets are publicly available at https://github.com/ISE-FIZKarlsruhe/concept_extraction.

Extractive reading comprehension question answering (QA) datasets are typically evaluated using Exact Match (EM) and F1-score, but these metrics often fail to fully capture model performance. With the success of large language models (LLMs), they have been employed in various tasks, including serving as judges (LLM-as-a-judge). In this paper, we reassess the performance of QA models using LLM-as-a-judge across four reading comprehension QA datasets. We examine different families of LLMs and various answer types to evaluate the effectiveness of LLM-as-a-judge in these tasks. Our results show that LLM-as-a-judge is highly correlated with human judgments and can replace traditional EM/F1 metrics. By using LLM-as-a-judge, the correlation with human judgments improves significantly, from 0.22 (EM) and 0.40 (F1-score) to 0.85. These findings confirm that EM and F1 metrics underestimate the true performance of the QA models. While LLM-as-a-judge is not perfect for more difficult answer types (e.g., job), it still outperforms EM/F1, and we observe no bias issues, such as self-preference, when the same model is used for both the QA and judgment tasks.

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) enables the creation and dissemination of information at massive scale and speed, it is increasingly important to understand how people perceive AI-generated content. One prominent policy proposal requires explicitly labeling AI-generated content to increase transparency and encourage critical thinking about the information, but prior research has not yet tested the effects of such labels. To address this gap, we conducted a survey experiment (N=1601) on a diverse sample of Americans, presenting participants with an AI-generated message about several public policies (e.g., allowing colleges to pay student-athletes), randomly assigning whether participants were told the message was generated by (a) an expert AI model, (b) a human policy expert, or (c) no label. We found that messages were generally persuasive, influencing participants' views of the policies by 9.74 percentage points on average. However, while 94.6% of participants assigned to the AI and human label conditions believed the authorship labels, labels had no significant effects on participants' attitude change toward the policies, judgments of message accuracy, nor intentions to share the message with others. These patterns were robust across a variety of participant characteristics, including prior knowledge of the policy, prior experience with AI, political party, education level, or age. Taken together, these results imply that, while authorship labels would likely enhance transparency, they are unlikely to substantially affect the persuasiveness of the labeled content, highlighting the need for alternative strategies to address challenges posed by AI-generated information.