aiqbench analysis
This paper tests whether a multi-agent LLM can communicate by handing its KV cache to a frozen reader model. Across eight substitution methods, none beat an uninformative cache baseline, and the authors argue the limit lies in the reader's attention rather than in how faithful the substitute is. The more useful result for practitioners is the positive one: letting the reader keep its own cache and attend over the sender's as extra context does improve on baseline. The evidence comes from one probe, so the claims are a characterization, not a general benchmark result.
Close Enough is Nowhere Near: Fidelity-Consumability Decoupling in KV Caches
arXiv:2610.22016v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent LLM systems communicate in text, which is lossy and wasteful: the sender throws away the reading it already did. A growing literature instead transmits the KV cache, the natural carrier of that reading. We study the most appealing form of the idea: both models stay frozen and the sender's cache is substituted for the reader's with nothing trained. It does not work, and the obstruction belongs to the reader. A frozen transformer reads only caches close to the one it would have written itself, a region we call its tolerable set. We show that geometric similarity to that cache does not predict whether the reader can use it, and the failure is not gradual, so a more faithful substitute is not the remedy it appears to be. We explain this phenomenon with competitive attention. Experimentally, we test eight diverse substitution methods against two measured anchors: an uninformative cache baseline and the reader's own accuracy from having read the passage. All sit at the baseline. That turns a long tail of separate negative results into one outcome with a stated condition for overturning it. A different design does work: if the reader keeps its own cache and attends over the sender's as extra context, adapting only its queries, it beats its own baseline, and also clears the baseline with eight senders pooled where undirected attention over the same union falls below it. We offer this as a characterization on one probe, not a leaderboard claim. Our central contribution is a redirection: pursuing faithful substitute caches is the wrong target; adding a cache to what the reader already has is the promising one.
Abstract:Multi-agent LLM systems communicate in text, which is lossy and wasteful: the sender throws away the reading it already did. A growing literature instead transmits the KV cache, the natural carrier of that reading. We study the most appealing form of the idea: both models stay frozen and the sender's cache is substituted for the reader's with nothing trained. It does not work, and the obstruction belongs to the reader. A frozen transformer reads only caches close to the one it would have written itself, a region we call its tolerable set. We show that geometric similarity to that cache does not predict whether the reader can use it, and the failure is not gradual, so a more faithful substitute is not the remedy it appears to be. We explain this phenomenon with competitive attention. Experimentally, we test eight diverse substitution methods against two measured anchors: an uninformative cache baseline and the reader's own accuracy from having read the passage. All sit at the baseline. That turns a long tail of separate negative results into one outcome with a stated condition for overturning it. A different design does work: if the reader keeps its own cache and attends over the sender's as extra context, adapting only its queries, it beats its own baseline, and also clears the baseline with eight senders pooled where undirected attention over the same union falls below it. We offer this as a characterization on one probe, not a leaderboard claim. Our central contribution is a redirection: pursuing faithful substitute caches is the wrong target; adding a cache to what the reader already has is the promising one.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.22016 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.22016v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.22016 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 366 words
