TL;DR
This paper investigates how different LLM profile designs impact routing performance, emphasizing the importance of structured profiles and their configurations for better model selection and generalization.
Contribution
It introduces a comprehensive design space for LLM profiles, systematically evaluates their effects on routing, and highlights the significance of profile structure and learning configurations.
Findings
Structured profiles outperform flat ones.
Query-level signals are more reliable than domain-level signals.
Structured profiles with trainable configurations improve generalization to new models.
Abstract
As the large language model (LLM) ecosystem expands, individual models exhibit varying capabilities across queries, benchmarks, and domains, motivating the development of LLM routing. While prior work has largely focused on router mechanism design, LLM profiles, which capture model capabilities, remain underexplored. In this work, we ask: How does LLM profile design affect routing performance across different routers? Addressing this question helps clarify the role of profiles in routing, disentangle profile design from router design, and enable fairer comparison and more principled development of routing systems. To this end, we view LLM profiling as a structured information integration problem over heterogeneous interaction histories. We develop a general design space of LLM profiles, named RouteProfile, along four key dimensions: organizational form, representation type, aggregation…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
