Higher-order pruning of experts in mixture-of-experts language models
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models suffer from large parameter counts, which create a significant memory bottleneck. Expert pruning is the most direct approach for reducing this parameter count, yet existing methods make pruning decisions for each expert independently, and assume experts' contributions are purely additive. In reality, expert usage in MoEs is inherently cooperative. We derive HOPE (Higher-Order Pruning of Experts), a second-order pruning objective which provably minimizes an upper bound on the error resulting from pruning. We show that REAP (a state-of-the-art first-order pruning method) is a special case of HOPE where interaction terms are ignored. Across three frontier MoE models (up to 122B parameters), two distinct calibration sets, and multiple benchmarks (including math, instruction following, coding, and an agentic suite), we demonstrate that HOPE produces better pruning decisions than existing methods, and its advantage is most pronounced at high pruning rates and on challenging agentic workloads. At 50% pruning, HOPE outperforms all baselines and achieves an average rank of 1.58 out of 5 methods (versus 2.42 for the next-best method, REAP), with gains of up to +6.1% on agentic coding. Over all conditions, HOPE again achieves the best average rank and surpasses every other method in the majority of head-to-head comparisons. By preserving cooperative expert structure that first-order methods ignore, HOPE enables aggressive compression with minimal degradation, particularly on complex tasks where diverse expert combinations are invoked over long sequences.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 15 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2026.
Builds on
15 of 17 references.
References · 15
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
- 2017Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layercited by 3,509
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
- 2024ChatGLM: A Family of Large Language Models from GLM-130B to GLM-4 All Toolscited by 1,121
- 2024Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Trainingcited by 1,053
- 2023WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-Instructcited by 733
- 2025SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?cited by 279
- 2025REAP the Experts: Why Pruning Prevails for One-Shot MoE compressioncited by 44
- 2025Finding Fantastic Experts in MoEs: A Unified Study for Expert Dropping Strategies and Observationscited by 20
- 2025Domain-Specific Pruning of Large Mixture-of-Experts Models with Few-shot Demonstrationscited by 16
- 2026How to Score Experts for One-Shot MoE Expert Pruning: A Unified Formulation and Selection Principlecited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Diversifying the Expert Knowledge for Task-Agnostic Pruning in Sparse Mixture-of-Experts
- 2026Does a Global Perspective Help Prune Sparse MoEs Elegantly?
- 2025Unveiling Hidden Collaboration within Mixture-of-Experts in Large Language Models
- 2024STUN: Structured-Then-Unstructured Pruning for Scalable MoE Pruning
- 2025Cluster-Driven Expert Pruning for Mixture-of-Experts Large Language Models
- 2024Not All Experts are Equal: Efficient Expert Pruning and Skipping for Mixture-of-Experts Large Language Models
- 2026It Takes a MAESTRO To Prune Bad Experts
- 2026Pruning and Distilling Mixture-of-Experts into Dense Language Models