SRCH:D15381BF
To what extent does token scheduling in sparse MoE inference improve robustness to distribution shift in docum
Abstract
Abstract: Sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models can outperform dense large language models at similar computation by activating only a small set of experts per token. However, stacking many expert modules introduces substantial parameter memory, which makes MoE models difficult to deploy in memory-constrained environments such as single-GPU devices. Offloading alleviates this issue by storing inactive experts in CPU memory and loading them on demand, but existing methods remain limited: static caches disregard input-dependent routing, and methods that train separate models to predict expert usage ahead
Research Question
To what extent does token scheduling in sparse MoE inference improve robustness to distribution shift in document-based QA (e.g., out-of-distribution chart styles or document layouts) measured by accuracy degradation and throughput consistency compared to dense baselines?
Verification Level
| Paper level | L1, Literature synthesis | |
| Source-grounded claims | 0 | |
| Claim record source | not publicly specified |
Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.
Quality Tier
| Tier | Quarantine candidate | |
| Basis | Review 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
| Status | CURRENT |
| Correction count | 0 |
| Manifest contract | paper-manifest-v1.1 |
| Correction contract | correction-record-v1 |
Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.
Provenance
| Publisher | Assignee Research |
| Public provenance | L2, Public artifact record |
| Report artifact | Available |
| External record | Not registered |
| Claim lineage | 0 aggregate source-grounded claims |
| Review method | Automated multi-reviewer assessment |
| Quality guide | How to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links |
| Provenance contract | source-provenance-v1 |
| Note | Machine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research. |