arXiv subjects

Saeid Shokoufa

Publications and source records attributed to Saeid Shokoufa.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

SafeStart: Mitigating the Overlooked Safety Cost of Active Expert Reduction in MoE LLM Serving

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models send each token through a few of many expert subnetworks. Serving methods make these models faster by running even fewer experts per token, and they are validated on accuracy benchmarks. We show that these methods can weaken the model's refusal of harmful requests, and we introduce SafeStart, which largely restores refusal while keeping most of the speedup. In vLLM on one RTX A6000, keeping about two thirds of the selected experts speeds up offline decoding by 15 to 28% at batch size 8. We find that, at this setting, under a jailbreak that tells the model not to refuse, the share of harmful requests that the model answers rises by 18.4 percentage points on Qwen1.5-MoE, 9.5 on OLMoE, and 6.6 on DeepSeek-V2-Lite, the three of nine models where it rises significantly, while MMLU accuracy drops by less than two points. We discover that most of this increase arises while the model processes the prompt and generates its first few tokens. SafeStart therefore runs all experts for the prompt and the first eight generated tokens, and the reduced set of experts afterwards, through a fused kernel in vLLM. With experts removed, SafeStart keeps at least 85% of the offline decode speedup at batch sizes 8 and 32 and brings the change under this jailbreak to between -2.1 and +1.3 points for three expert-reduction methods on these three models. On 889 held-out requests, in an analysis fixed before generation, truncation raises harmful compliance by 5.8 to 21.4 points, and SafeStart leaves a rise of 0.6 to 2.6 points, non-inferior to the original model on two of the three models. Our results show that faster MoE serving need not cost safety: a serving system can keep most of the gain from running fewer experts by running all of them at the start of each response, and it should test refusal, not only accuracy, before it enables such a method.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Running Fewer Loops Removes Refusal Behaviour in Recurrent-Depth Language Models

A recurrent-depth language model reuses one block of weights several times in a row. The number of repetitions, which we call loops, is chosen when the model runs, not when it is trained, and running fewer is cheaper and faster, so a deployment may choose to do it. Running fewer loops also makes these models less safe, and the loss of safety is larger than the loss of anything else we measured. We study four released Ouro checkpoints and Huginn-0125. At half of its trained depth, Ouro-1.4B-Thinking still solves 0.692 of the GSM8K maths problems, against 0.775 at full depth, keeping 89% of its accuracy. Over the same reduction, the rate at which it helps with harmful requests rises from 0.038 to 0.205, 5.3 times higher. The information is not lost: a linear classifier reads whether a request is harmful from the model's internal state after a single loop, with an ROC AUC of 0.967 against 0.986 at full depth. What the missing loops remove is the refusal that should follow. We measure the effect with four instruments, one generating no text at all, and reproduce it on a second model family. Removing a single direction from Ouro-1.4B's internal state at full depth drops its refusal rate on harmful prompts from 0.950 to 0.130, identifying what the shallow model is missing. Two run-time repairs do not help: the models' early-exit rules do not spend more loops on harmful requests, and choosing a depth per request does not recover the loss. Changing the training does. Standard safety training makes the shallow model safe only by refusing 0.865 of harmless requests, while training at randomly chosen depths reaches a separation of +0.399 between harmful and harmless refusal at one loop, against +0.118. On Huginn-0125 it keeps harmful help at or below 0.040 at every depth from 1 to 32 loops, where standard training reaches 0.194, and it costs no accuracy at full depth.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Sharpen Without Search: On-Policy Distillation of Sequence-Level Power Distribution

A language model can give a correct answer more probability than any single incorrect answer and still usually sample an incorrect one, because the incorrect answers together hold more probability. The power distribution raises each complete answer's probability to a power above one and renormalizes, shifting probability toward answers the model finds most likely (sharpening). Sampling from it improves reasoning without changing parameters, but needs many scored candidates per query. We show that a model can instead be trained to produce such answers in one generation. On-policy power distillation (OPPD) runs a sequential Monte Carlo sampler in which the model being trained generates candidates and a frozen teacher's power distribution weights them; the same probabilities weight each answer in a maximum-likelihood update. Training raises single-generation accuracy by up to 23.0 points on MATH500 and 27.3 on GSM8K over the untrained model at the same temperature, and one generation scores 2.4 and 3.5 points above published power sampling with 64 candidates, recovering 94 percent of the gain that 16 candidates give the untrained model. For context, against GRPO trained with verified rewards from the same checkpoint and budget, OPPD scores 3.8, 4.0 and 5.4 points higher on MATH500, GSM8K and AIME using no reference answers; the two are complementary, and OPPD applied after GRPO adds up to 9.3 points. Trained only on mathematics, OPPD raises HumanEval accuracy by up to 5.3 points. One loss coefficient moves the sharpening exponent the model absorbs between 1.19 and 2.02, against 1.14 for ordinary on-policy distillation, and it rises mostly on the model's own answers. Gains hold across model families and sizes, including a model already trained with verified rewards, where lowering the temperature gives nothing and OPPD adds 4.4 points on MATH500. Code: https://github.com/ArminAzizi98/OPPD.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Fair on the Surface? Benchmarking Hidden-Output Fairness Gaps in LLM Recommenders

Fairness audits for LLM-based recommenders have largely focused on observable outputs, implicitly assuming that stable recommendations reflect stable internal processing. We challenge this assumption with FairGap, the first benchmark to jointly evaluate recommendation fairness at two levels: observable output shift (OBS) and hidden representation shift (IBS), measured through controlled counterfactual identity probes across gender, age, and race. Their relationship is summarized via Representation-Output Alignment (ROA), with quadrant diagnostics for identifying user-level hidden-output mismatch. Applied to six open-weight LLM families across three domains, FairGap reveals pervasive hidden-output decoupling: ROA rarely exceeds 0.22, and a non-negligible user population shows stable outputs despite substantial internal shifts, a mode that output-only audits cannot detect by design. Further, activation steering that reduces IBS by up to 8x simultaneously worsens OBS, demonstrating a fundamental tension between internal and output-level fairness that existing frameworks are unequipped to diagnose.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Multi-Level Modeling of Large Language Model Inference Latency and Energy via Hybrid Analytical--Machine-Learning Predictors

The rapid scaling of Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly increased computational cost, energy consumption, and inference latency, making accurate estimation essential for sustainable artificial intelligence deployment and hardware-aware design. In this work, we introduce Hybrid Modeling for Energy and Latency of LLMs (HYMELL), a hybrid three-level framework for estimating LLM inference latency and energy by combining analytical modeling with machine learning (ML). HYMELL models LLM execution through a three-level hierarchy: analytical estimation of primitive operations, ML prediction of higher-level components, and an end-to-end model that captures system-level overheads across both prefill and decode phases. The framework supports diverse architectures, including dense and mixture-of-experts (MoE) feed-forward networks (FFNs), as well as multi-head attention (MHA) and grouped-query attention (GQA) mechanisms. Evaluated on an NVIDIA H100 graphics processing unit (GPU), HYMELL achieves high predictive accuracy; notably, for LLaMA 3 8B, it attains less than 5% error for both prefill and decode phases. By predicting execution costs directly from architectural parameters, it enables fast, hardware-free design space exploration and energy-efficient optimization.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

HDLFORGE: A Two-Stage Multi-Agent Framework for Efficient Verilog Code Generation with Adaptive Model Escalation

We present HDLFORGE, a two-stage multi-agent framework for automated Verilog generation that optimizes the trade-off between generation speed and accuracy. The system uses a compact coder with a medium-sized LLM by default (Stage A) and escalates to a stronger coder with an ultra-large LLM (Stage B) only when needed, guided by a calibrated score from inexpensive diagnostics including compilation, lint, and smoke tests. A key innovation is a counterexample-guided formal agent that converts bounded-model-checking traces into reusable micro-tests, significantly reducing bug detection time and repair iterations. The portable escalation controller can wrap existing Verilog LLM pipelines without modifying their internals. Evaluated on VerilogEval Human, VerilogEval V2, and RTLLM benchmarks, HDLFORGE demonstrates improved accuracy-latency trade-offs compared to single-stage systems through comprehensive analysis of wall-clock time distributions, escalation thresholds, and agent ablations. On VerilogEval Human and VerilogEval V2, HDLFORGE-Qwen achieves 91.2% and 91.8% Pass@1 with roughly 50% lower median latency, dramatically improving accuracy over other medium-sized models, and 97.2% Pass@5 on RTLLM.

cs.AR↗