mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Design and Evaluation of Cost-Aware PoQ for Decentralized LLM Inference

arXiv 2512.16317 ↗First posted 18 Dec 2025cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Decentralized large language model (LLM) inference promises transparent and censorship resistant access to advanced AI, yet existing verification approaches struggle to scale to modern models. Proof of Quality (PoQ) replaces cryptographic verification of computation with consensus over output quality, but the original formulation ignores heterogeneous computational costs across inference and evaluator nodes. This paper introduces a cost-aware PoQ framework that integrates explicit efficiency measurements into the reward mechanism for both types of nodes. The design combines ground truth token level F1, lightweight learned evaluators, and GPT based judgments within a unified evaluation pipeline, and adopts a linear reward function that balances normalized quality and cost. Experiments on extractive question answering and abstractive summarization use five instruction tuned LLMs ranging from TinyLlama-1.1B to Llama-3.2-3B and three evaluation models spanning cross encoder and bi encoder architectures. Results show that a semantic textual similarity bi encoder achieves much higher correlation with both ground truth and GPT scores than cross encoders, indicating that evaluator architecture is a critical design choice for PoQ. Quality-cost analysis further reveals that the largest models in the pool are also the most efficient in terms of quality per unit latency. Monte Carlo simulations over 5,000 PoQ rounds demonstrate that the cost-aware reward scheme consistently assigns higher average rewards to high quality low cost inference models and to efficient evaluators, while penalizing slow low quality nodes. These findings suggest that cost-aware PoQ provides a practical foundation for economically sustainable decentralized LLM inference.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Dec 2025.

Builds on

18 of 36 references.

References · 18

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  3. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  4. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  5. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  6. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  7. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  8. 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,823
  9. 2016MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Datasetcited by 1,605
  10. 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,538
  11. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
  12. 2020ColBERT: Efficient and Effective Passage Search via Contextualized Late Interaction over BERTcited by 1,178
6 more
  1. 2015Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehendcited by 1,049
  2. 2019Poly-encoders: Transformer Architectures and Pre-training Strategies for Fast and Accurate Multi-sentence Scoringcited by 165
  3. 2018Slalom: Fast, Verifiable and Private Execution of Neural Networks in Trusted Hardwarecited by 102
  4. 2019A Survey of Distributed Consensus Protocols for Blockchain Networkscited by 16
  5. 2018FHIRChain: Applying Blockchain to Securely and Scalably Share Clinical Datacited by 7
  6. 2024Proof of Quality: A Costless Paradigm for Trustless Generative AI Model Inference on Blockchainscited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.