Evaluating Performance Drift from Model Switching in Multi-Turn LLM Systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deployed multi-turn LLM systems routinely switch models mid-interaction due to upgrades, cross-provider routing, and fallbacks. Such handoffs create a context mismatch: the model generating later turns must condition on a dialogue prefix authored by a different model, potentially inducing silent performance drift. We introduce a switch-matrix benchmark that measures this effect by running a prefix model for early turns and a suffix model for the final turn, and comparing against the no-switch baseline using paired episode-level bootstrap confidence intervals. Across CoQA conversational QA and Multi-IF benchmarks, even a single-turn handoff yields prevalent and statistically significant, directional effects and may swing outcomes by -8 to +13 percentage points in Multi-IF strict success rate and +/- 4 absolute F1 on CoQA, comparable to the no-switch gap between common model tiers (e.g., GPT-5-nano vs GPT-5-mini). We further find systematic compatibility patterns: some suffix models degrade under nearly any non-self dialogue history, while others improve under nearly any foreign prefix. To enable compressed handoff risk monitoring, we decompose switch-induced drift into per-model prefix influence and suffix susceptibility terms, accounting for ~70% of variance across benchmarks. These results position handoff robustness as an operational reliability dimension that single-model benchmarks miss, motivating explicit monitoring and handoff-aware mitigation in multi-turn systems.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 10 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Mar 2026.
Builds on
9 of 10 references.
References · 9
- 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,143
- 2023FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performancecited by 791
- 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 674
- 2023How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?cited by 265
- 2024Multi-IF: Benchmarking LLMs on Multi-Turn and Multilingual Instructions Followingcited by 94
- 2024MT-Eval: A Multi-Turn Capabilities Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 78
- 2025ChatInject: Abusing Chat Templates for Prompt Injection in LLM Agentscited by 28
- 2025Can Language Models Follow Multiple Turns of Entangled Instructions?cited by 14
- 2025Evaluating the Sensitivity of LLMs to Prior Contextcited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Models Recall What They Violate: Constraint Adherence in Multi-Turn LLM Ideationcited by 2
- 2026The Workload-Router-Pool Architecture for LLM Inference Optimization: A Vision Paper from the vLLM Semantic Router Projectcited by 1
- 2026The Handoff Tax: Continuing Non-Native Trajectories in LLM Agentscited by 1
- 2026Coordinates of Capability: A Unified MTMM-Geometric Framework for LLM Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026The Handoff Tax: Continuing Non-Native Trajectories in LLM Agents25 Aug 2026
- 2026Coordinates of Capability: A Unified MTMM-Geometric Framework for LLM Evaluation8 May 2026
- 2026Models Recall What They Violate: Constraint Adherence in Multi-Turn LLM Ideation30 Apr 2026
- 2026The Workload-Router-Pool Architecture for LLM Inference Optimization: A Vision Paper from the vLLM Semantic Router Project22 Mar 2026