analiza aiqbench
This paper studies when a small language model should hand a query to a larger one, and proposes using disagreement between model outputs as a routing signal that needs no ground-truth labels. That matters for edge and robotics deployments, where labeled correctness data is costly to collect for open-ended and agentic tasks. The results are reported as tradeoffs between routing cost and accuracy, so practitioners should check how well disagreement tracks real errors on their own workloads before relying on it.
Disagreement-Guided Weak-to-Strong Routing
arXiv:2610.22245v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Small language models are increasingly deployed on edge devices and robotic systems to meet cost and latency constraints, yet their limited capabilities can make reliable deployment challenging. Stronger models can provide assistance when needed, but deciding when to route a weak-model response to a stronger model often relies on signals of response correctness. In open-ended and agentic tasks, however, obtaining such signals can require costly ground-truth supervision that is difficult to obtain at scale. We revisit the foundations of weak-to-strong routing and ask whether routing decisions can instead be guided by signals that do not require ground-truth supervision. We first characterize the optimal weak-to-strong routing policy, while allowing for multiple weak-model responses generated through local inference. Building on this characterization, we derive a principled approximation to the optimal routing based on model-to-model comparison. In particular, we introduce a notion of model disagreement that can be measured directly from model-generated responses, without ground-truth supervision. Importantly, the approximation becomes increasingly accurate as the strong model becomes a better proxy for the ground-truth distribution. Across agentic and single-turn tasks, our approach effectively navigates the trade-off between routing cost and response accuracy without ground-truth supervision. Moreover, even when ground-truth correctness signals are available for training, disagreement-based routing can outperform methods trained directly to predict correctness
Abstract:Small language models are increasingly deployed on edge devices and robotic systems to meet cost and latency constraints, yet their limited capabilities can make reliable deployment challenging. Stronger models can provide assistance when needed, but deciding when to route a weak-model response to a stronger model often relies on signals of response correctness. In open-ended and agentic tasks, however, obtaining such signals can require costly ground-truth supervision that is difficult to obtain at scale. We revisit the foundations of weak-to-strong routing and ask whether routing decisions can instead be guided by signals that do not require ground-truth supervision. We first characterize the optimal weak-to-strong routing policy, while allowing for multiple weak-model responses generated through local inference. Building on this characterization, we derive a principled approximation to the optimal routing based on model-to-model comparison. In particular, we introduce a notion of model disagreement that can be measured directly from model-generated responses, without ground-truth supervision. Importantly, the approximation becomes increasingly accurate as the strong model becomes a better proxy for the ground-truth distribution. Across agentic and single-turn tasks, our approach effectively navigates the trade-off between routing cost and response accuracy without ground-truth supervision. Moreover, even when ground-truth correctness signals are available for training, disagreement-based routing can outperform methods trained directly to predict correctness
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.22245 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.22245v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.22245 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 305 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026

The Entangled Dimensions of Decision Theory
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026