mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

External Experience Serving in Production LLM Systems: A Deployment-Oriented Study of Quality-Cost Trade-offs

arXiv 2606.11806 ↗First posted 10 Jun 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Production LLM systems accumulate reusable operational experience, but the practical deployment issue is not merely whether such experience can help. It is how different serving strategies trade off quality against online cost under realistic constraints. Injecting external experience can improve task quality, yet it also increases prompt burden, latency, and serving pressure. We study textitexternal experience serving as a deployment-oriented quality-cost trade-off problem. We evaluate this question in a real production moderation setting, with tool-use and GPQA as supporting contrast tasks that expose different output-cost regimes. We compare no-experience baselines, random experience controls, global prompt injection, and retrieval-based selective injection, and analyze both task quality and serving cost. The results show that, once experience becomes case-dependent, selective retrieval provides a stronger operating point than unconditional global injection. They further show that retrieval quality matters more than simply increasing Top-K, and that the same serving policy can exhibit substantially different cost-benefit profiles across short-output and decode-heavy regimes. These findings suggest that external experience is best treated as a selective, cost-aware serving decision rather than as a universal add-on. Overall, in the settings studied here, external experience pays off only when both the serving interface and the task-specific cost structure make its quality gains worth the online cost.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2026.

Builds on

10 of 18 references.

References · 10

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  3. 2022FlashAttention: Fast and Memory-Efficient Exact Attention with IO-Awarenesscited by 3,673
  4. 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
  5. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
  6. 2021Improving language models by retrieving from trillions of tokenscited by 1,293
  7. 2023REPLUG: Retrieval-Augmented Black-Box Language Modelscited by 792
  8. 2023In-Context Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 702
  9. 2026Thinking with Reasoning Skills: Fewer Tokens, More Accuracycited by 4
  10. 2026BEAR: Budgeted Evidence Allocation for Multi-Document Reasoningcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026From Production Traffic to Post-Training: Building a Self-Hosted LLM That Covers the Corporate Request Mix
  2. 2026The Handoff Tax: Continuing Non-Native Trajectories in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Incentives and Evidence in Learned Service Orchestration
  4. 2026Human-Less LLM Serving: Quantifying the Human Tax on Throughput
  5. 2026A Year in LLM Serving: Workload Evolution, Caching and Load-Balancing
  6. 2026LLM within MCP Matters: Measuring Inefficient Resource Utilization Driven by LLMs
  7. 2026Prompt Compression in Production Task Orchestration: A Pre-Registered Randomized Trial
  8. 2026How Fast Do Agents Rot? An Empirical Study of Long-Horizon Degradation in LLM Agents for Production Decision-Making