Understanding the Physics of Key-Value Cache Compression for LLMs through Attention Dynamics
On the map: Efficient LLM inference and serving → KV cache optimization
Abstract (arXiv)
As context windows in LLMs scale to 100K+ tokens, the key-value (KV) cache becomes the dominant memory bottleneck, with recent methods claiming 80-90% savings and minimal benchmark degradation. We argue these evaluations miss a structural issue: attention is not just storage but routing, and retaining KV pairs does not guarantee semantic accessibility. We propose a physics-inspired view of KV compression as a controlled perturbation of token-level routing, distinguishing retention, accessibility, and utilization. Using synthetic tasks probing multi-entity tracking, disambiguation, coreference, and multi-hop reasoning, we find that moderate compression degrades internal representations with little accuracy loss, revealing redundancy; all models exhibit a sharp hallucination safety cliff near 90% compression, correlated with spikes in Global Eviction Ratio (GER), suggesting a phase transition in semantic reachability; and architectures differ in routing dynamics, with LLaMA showing early consensus and late diversification, and Qwen showing funnel-like late convergence, leading to distinct resilience profiles. Beyond erasure, we identify representational rigidity, where excessive head-level consensus collapses routing flexibility despite token survival. These results suggest sparse token-route structures govern compression tolerance, reframing KV compression as a structural probe of attention geometry and linking long-context scalability to sparsity and the lottery ticket hypothesis in self-attention.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in KV cache optimization, one of 12 directions in Efficient LLM inference and serving. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2026.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026How Much Cache Does Reasoning Need? Depth-Cache Tradeoffs in KV-Compressed Transformerscited by 3
- 2026KV Cache Offloading for Context-Intensive Taskscited by 1
- 2026Transactional Attention: Semantic Sponsorship for KV-Cache Retentioncited by 1
- 2026Understanding Sparse Attention Selectivity in Long-Context Foundation Models via Counterfactual Evaluationcited by 1
- 2026Pixel Decodability Is Not a Compression Signal: Causally Evaluating Importance Proxies for Visual KV-Cache Evictioncited by 0
- 2026Understanding Sparse Attention Selectivity in Long-Context Foundation Models via Counterfactual Evaluation3 Aug 2026
- 2026Pixel Decodability Is Not a Compression Signal: Causally Evaluating Importance Proxies for Visual KV-Cache Eviction27 Jul 2026
- 2026How Much Cache Does Reasoning Need? Depth-Cache Tradeoffs in KV-Compressed Transformers20 Apr 2026
- 2026Transactional Attention: Semantic Sponsorship for KV-Cache Retention13 Apr 2026
- 2026KV Cache Offloading for Context-Intensive Tasks9 Apr 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Information-Aware KV Cache Compression for Long Reasoning
- 2025Semantic Integrity Matters: Benchmarking and Preserving High-Density Reasoning in KV Cache Compression
- 2025CompressKV: Semantic Retrieval Heads Know What Tokens are Not Important Before Generation
- 2025Key, Value, Compress: A Systematic Exploration of KV Cache Compression Techniques
- 2026More Than a Quick Glance: Overcoming the Greedy Bias in KV-Cache Compression
- 2026Moment-KV: Momentum-Based Decode-Time KV Cache Compression for Long Generation
- 2024RazorAttention: Efficient KV Cache Compression Through Retrieval Heads
- 2025REAL: REtrieval-reAsoning and Logic-constructed Attention Behaviors for Long-Context KV Cache Compression