跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 15:33 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 16:22 — 2026-11-08 16:22(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-08 15:33最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 15:31(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.07982

How Far Can Lightweight LLMs Go in Intent-to-SLO Translation?

Sabbir Ahmed, Hazem Abbas, Salimur Choudhury

原文摘要

Intent-based networking (IBN) promises QoS provisioning in which the network derives the configuration from operator-stated goals. Its first step, translating a natural-language intent into enforceable service-level objectives (SLOs) grounded in a live snapshot of the network state, increasingly relies on large language models (LLMs). These large models add cost and energy to the management loop and typically require multi-GPU, cloud-hosted infrastructure. Can lightweight open LLMs take over this step dependably? We answer this question with a five-dimensional evaluation of ten LLMs with <10B parameters from five families, under four prompting setups, on 716 placement intents. We evaluate translation performance, intent validation, hallucination, energy impact, and robustness to diverse phrasing. The best configurations translate intents with a strict F1 of 0.943 and reject up to 191 of 195 invalid intents. With few-shot reasoning, the strongest models hallucinate unsupported QoS requirements in only about one response in a hundred, whereas the zero-shot setup struggles. A translated intent costs 0.044-0.148 Wh of GPU energy without reasoning, and added energy cost for reasoning pays off for the weaker models. Furthermore, we show that realistic rephrasing lowers the rejection of invalid intents in 15 of 16 configurations for the best-performing models, leaving robust intent validation as a key open challenge for reliable IBN. Our code and data are available: https://github.com/ggck43/intent2slo.

cs.NI · cs.CL