# ACE: Adaptive Calibration-Free Expert Skipping for MoE-based LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05228 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.05228/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Expert routing strategies, one of 12 directions in Mixture-of-experts.
- Builds on 16 of its 22 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- Mixture-of-experts / [Expert routing strategies](https://mlsanity.com/moe/expert-routing-strategies/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1701.06538/) (2017)
- [Pointer Sentinel Mixture Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.07843/) (2016)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.11641/) (2019)
- [MoE-Pruner: Pruning Mixture-of-Experts Large Language Model using the Hints from Its Router](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12013/) (2024)
- [Dynamic Mixture of Experts: An Auto-Tuning Approach for Efficient Transformer Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14297/) (2024)
- [REAP the Experts: Why Pruning Prevails for One-Shot MoE compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.13999/) (2025)
- [STUN: Structured-Then-Unstructured Pruning for Scalable MoE Pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.06211/) (2024)
- [Ada-K Routing: Boosting the Efficiency of MoE-based LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10456/) (2024)
- [XShare: Collaborative in-Batch Expert Sharing for Faster MoE Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07265/) (2026)
- [AIMER: Calibration-Free Task-Agnostic MoE Expert Pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.18492/) (2026)
- [Alloc-MoE: Budget-Aware Expert Activation Allocation for Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.08133/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures provide an efficient paradigm for scaling large language models (LLMs), yet fixed top-k routing activates the same number of expert slots for every token, causing substantial redundant computation. Existing expert-skipping methods often rely on router confidence, calibration data, or additional training, and therefore cannot reliably estimate the actual contribution of routed experts. To this end, we propose ACE, a training-free, calibration-free, and checkpoint-preserving framework for token-adaptive expert skipping in MoE-based LLMs. ACE contains two complementary components: 1) Global Spectral Proxy (GSP), which estimates global transformation capacity from the coupled gate, up, and down projections together with RMSNorm scaling; and 2) Router-Conditioned Refinement (RCR), which constructs expert-specific direction prototypes from centered router weights and evaluates expert responses along routing-preferred directions. During inference, ACE combines both estimates with runtime router gates and skips an expert slot only when both views identify it as low-contribution, while always retaining the top-1 expert. All expert statistics are computed offline, leaving only table lookups and lightweight scalar operations online. Extensive experiments across three MoE-based LLMs and eight benchmarks demonstrate that ACE consistently outperforms existing static and dynamic baselines, with increasingly pronounced advantages under aggressive expert skipping. For instance, at a 50% skipping ratio on Qwen3.6-35B-A3B, ACE reduces WikiText-2 perplexity by 7.96% and improves average downstream accuracy by 4.15 percentage points over the strongest competing method.