Wenxun Wang, Xiuhong Li, Yida Wang, Chen Tang, Zongle Huang, Ke Hong, Yu Wang, Yongpan Liu
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models have become prevailing, yet their distributed deployment suffers from severe dynamic load imbalance due to the conflict between static expert placement and inherent routing dynamism. While host DRAM offers capacity to avoid static device storage for load balancing, we identify existing offloading works fundamentally fail in distributed inference due to two overlooked challenges: (1) coupled performance impacts of runtime Host-to-Device transfers due to load dynamism and shared PCIe topology; (2) system-level memory overhead incurred by DRAM usage at scale. In this paper, we propose vExpert that shifts DRAM offloading paradigm from partial residency to full redundancy through virtualized expert storage. We pioneer the first systematic performance model that jointly captures H2D latency, PCIe contention, and load imbalance, building a lightweight allocator to dynamically map physical experts to virtual slots runtime. A novel disaggregated manager is designed to reduce memory overhead in multi-process environments. Evaluated on DeepSeek-V3.1 within an 8-node H100 cluster, vExpert improves load balance ratio by up to 55% and achieves 1.2$\times$ end-to-end speedup.
Valentin Six, Mufei Li, Dongqi Fu, Yinglong Xia, Hong Li, Pan Li
Different retrievers exist for retrieval-augmented generation, yet none performs best for all queries. Therefore, the key question is: given a query and retrieved passages from different retrievers, which one is most suited for that query? Existing routers usually make predictions from query-specific features and a fixed pool of retrievers; such routers have no output for an unseen retriever and are incapable by design on a new corpus. To fill these gaps, RAGCompass reads the retrieved passage sets themselves: passages from an unfamiliar retriever or corpus stay directly comparable to other passages, so routing stays well designed where a query-only map would fail. We contrastively fine-tune a reranker against the answer each evidence set produces, which accounts for most of the gain; a small comparison head adds a moderate improvement, and neither component has retriever-specific parameters. RAGCompass improves answer F1 by 28% relative to the best fixed retriever, and outperforms fusion baselines, three query-only routers, and a prompted 8B language model. Generalization experiments show that RAGCompass keeps most of its gain under an unseen corpus, retriever, or reader, while query-only baselines fall to the best fixed retriever or below.
Rongzhe Wei, Ge Shi, Min Cheng, Sarthak Ghosh, Vaibhav Gorde, Leman Akoglu, Pan Li, Na Zhang
Enterprises increasingly want LLM agents to automate standard operating procedures over their software stacks -- mapping each step of a procedure to the right call among thousands of internal APIs, without hand-authored step-to-API mappings. The core difficulty is API selection at scale: choosing and composing the correct tools over a long horizon, judged only by whether the overall task succeeds. Current tool-use benchmarks do not test this regime -- they expose only a handful of tools, evaluate single-step invocation, or grade multi-step behavior with subjective LLM-as-a-judge scores that penalize valid alternative trajectories. We introduce SLATE (Synthetic Large-scale API Toolkit for E-commerce), a large-scale benchmark that tests large-toolset, long-horizon API selection in a realistic enterprise domain. SLATE couples (i) queries decomposed into hierarchical, tool-grounded procedures over a ~1,000-tool e-commerce library, (ii) a deterministic, context-aware simulator that returns recorded outputs for matching calls and default responses otherwise, and (iii) an end-to-end task-success metric -- a task succeeds when it reaches every reference outcome -- that credits diverse-but-valid trajectories while remaining fully automatic and reproducible. Experiments with six open decision models and the language models they are built on, from 3B to 12B parameters, show that even the best model completes only 5.0% of the tasks, establishing SLATE as a challenging testbed for reliable enterprise tool use. We release SLATE, its simulator, and the evaluation harness at https://geshijoker.github.io/slate/
Alexander Scarlatos Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Jaewook Lee, Simon Woodhead Eedi, Andrew Lan University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Advances in large language models (LLMs) enable many new innovations in education. However, evaluating the effectiveness of new technology requires real students, which is time-consuming and hard to scale up. Therefore, many recent works on LLM-powered tutoring solutions have used simulated students for both training and evaluation, often via simple prompting. Surprisingly, little work has been done to ensure or even measure the quality of simulated students. In this work, we formally define the student simulation task, propose a set of evaluation metrics that span linguistic, behavioral, and cognitive aspects, and benchmark a wide range of student simulation methods on these metrics. We experiment on a real-world math tutoring dialogue dataset, where both automated and human evaluation results show that prompting strategies for student simulation perform poorly; supervised fine-tuning and preference optimization yield much better but still limited performance, motivating future work on this challenging task.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Guangrui Fan, DanDan Liu, Aznul Qalid MD Sabri, Rui Zhang Taiyuan University of Science and Technology, Pan Lihu Taiyuan University of Science and Technology
When asked explicitly, a Large language model (LLM) may validate your anger—but implicitly, it may still judge that anger as inappropriate. We call this divergence the endorsement–exposure gap, and it reveals that LLMs encode hidden norms about which emotions are acceptable in which contexts. To measure these norms systematically, we introduce Feeling Rules Atlas, a benchmark of 1,320 vignettes spanning 6 institutional settings, 12 roles, 7 emotions, and 5 intensity levels. We pair the benchmark with two probes: explicit norm judgments (APPROPRIATE/INAPPROPRIATE/DEPENDS) and implicit acceptability scored by log-likelihood contrast. Across six model families, we find large cross-model variation in sanctioning thresholds and institutional “norm signatures” not reducible to overall strictness; models that appear similarly lenient explicitly can diverge sharply in implicit judgments. These results establish normative affect—context-conditioned judgments of emotional appropriateness—as a distinct alignment axis, and motivate transparent profiling of feeling rules for emotionally sensitive deployments.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表