mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluating Inference Compute for Generative AI: A Framework for Enterprise Workloads

arXiv 2610.07094 ↗First posted 5 Oct 2026cs.AR cs.DC cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents also fits: Agent memory systems

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM deployment is shifting from single-turn completion to agentic trajectories in which a model plans, calls tools, reads results and reasons at test time before acting. This inverts the economics of inference hardware: chat serving amortises weight reads across large batches, whereas agent trajectories are sequentially dependent, run at effective batch one, and make per-token decode latency (TPOT) the dominant term in task completion time. Using a roofline analysis and a closed-form episode-latency model, we show why this regime favours accelerators that keep weights in on-die SRAM (Cerebras WSE-3/3T, Groq/NVIDIA LPU) or compiler-managed tiered memory (SambaNova SN40L/SN50), and why three vendor ecosystems converged in 2026 on disaggregated prefill/decode serving. We show that per-step reliability compounds exponentially in trajectory length-a 2% per-step failure rate erases a 2x decode advantage for a 20-step agent-so determinism and tail latency are first-order performance variables. We then propose a four-layer evaluation framework (silicon, serving system, agent episode, enterprise) with a metric set built on goodput at an agentic SLO and cost per successful episode, a six-axis benchmark protocol over six task families, a paired-bootstrap statistical design, an attestation protocol for vendor-run benchmarks, and TCO, availability and adoption-timing models with explicit break-even conditions. All performance figures are public and labelled by evidence class; we state seven falsifiable hypotheses and the experiments that test them, and argue that the most likely original result is that token-throughput rankings diverge from cost-per-successful-task rankings on long-horizon work.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026From LLM Inference to Agentic Workloads: Characterization and Implications for Serving Systems
  2. 2026Heterogeneous Computing: The Key to Powering the Future of AI Agent Inference
  3. 2026SPORK: Self-Speculative Forking to Accelerate Agentic LLM Inference
  4. 2026AgentPerfBench: A Benchmarking and Evaluation Suite for Inference Performance of Agentic LLMs
  5. 2026Understanding Inference Scaling for LLMs: Bottlenecks, Trade-offs, and Performance Principles
  6. 2026InferenceBench: A Benchmark for Open-Ended LLM Inference Optimization by AI Agents
  7. 2026End-to-End Latency-Minimizing and Load-Balanced Request Scheduling for Edge LLM Inference in Agentic AI Services
  8. 2026Sutradhara: An Intelligent Orchestrator-Engine Co-design for Tool-based Agentic Inference