Index |  Research ▾  |  Verification ▾  | About
SRCH:0BDF1279

How does scaling top-k selection in SMoES affect inference throughput and MMMU accuracy trade-off under cross-

Submitted: 28 May 2026
Review score: 4.50/10
Verification: L1, Literature synthesis
Gate status: Unverified
Quality tier: Quarantine candidate

Abstract

Abstract: Sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures enable efficient scaling of large language models through conditional computation, yet the routing mechanisms responsible for expert selection remain poorly understood. In this work, we introduce routing signatures, a vector representation summarizing expert activation patterns across layers for a given prompt, and use them to study whether MoE routing exhibits task-conditioned structure. Using OLMoE-1B-7B-0125-Instruct as an empirical testbed, we show that prompts from the same task category induce highly similar routing signatures, while prompts

Research Question

How does scaling top-k selection in SMoES affect inference throughput and MMMU accuracy trade-off under cross-modal adversarial attacks versus dense VLMs?

Verification Level

Paper levelL1, Literature synthesis
Source-grounded claims0
Claim record sourcenot publicly specified

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Truth-Engine Gate Verdict

StatusUnverified
GateGate 2 — Verification (formal proof or sandbox reproduction)
ReasonPublished before the Gate 2 verification pipeline was activated (2026-06-10). No formal proof or sandbox reproduction has been attempted for this record.
Evaluated2026-06-10T06:30:49+00:00

This record has not completed Gate 2 of the verification pipeline (a type-checked Lean4 proof for mathematical claims, or a sealed-sandbox reproduction for empirical claims). It is a literature synthesis only. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.

Quality Tier

TierQuarantine candidate
BasisReview score is below 5.0; source-level inspection is required before relying on the synthesis.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength LOW
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status MEDIUM

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL2, Public artifact record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordNot registered
Claim lineage0 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.