What happened
arXiv:2609.17786v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Fairness-aware model compression requires selecting methods and configurations that balance accuracy, fairness, and deployment cost. These decisions become more difficult when compression methods are composed or the user's requirements change. In this paper, we propose FairCompressAgent (FCA), an agentic framework that integrates fairness-aware pruning, incremental quantization, and sparse low-rank factorization through a common operator interface. A language-model planner uses model profiles and measured outcomes to select compression configurations, while an execution layer performs compression, fine-tuning, evaluation, and constraint-based selection. FCA also supports requirement updates and reports the remaining violation when a request cannot be satisfied. Experiments on Fitzpatrick-17k with VGG-11 compare four search methods over 40 measured configurations. Under the accuracy-constrained request, FCA selects a compressed model with 59.54% less inference tensor storage, while validation average precision increases from 0.5141 to 0.5233 and equalized opportunity (EOpp) decreases from 0.2251 to 0.2168. It reaches the same final selection as one-shot planning with 7.33 versus 12 candidate evaluations on average, under their respective stopping policies. Repeated fine-tuning, held-out testing, and online requirement updates characterize the stability and interactive use of this compression workflow. The results demonstrate how measured feedback and explicit constraints support the selection and interactive refinement of fairness-aware compression configurations. Update (2026-09-17): The Inference Engineering Pareto Atlas: Which Optimizations Dominate the Cost, Quality, and Latency Frontier?. arXiv:2609.17863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM inference optimizations report speedups on different models, GPUs, prompts, and quality metrics, making them hard to compare or combine. We build a cost, quality, and latency Pareto atlas to identify the best configurations for different deployment constraints. Since exhaustive testing is impractical, we measure 54 configurations of Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct running on vLLM 0.12 across L4, A100, and H100 GPUs and use these anchors to calibrate a simulator. It reproduces measurements at anchored batch sizes, with cross campaign drift below 1.5 percent. A separate quality evaluation tests FP16, AWQ 4bit, FP8 weights, and FP8 KV cache on 200 GSM8K questions with five examples per prompt. Sparse attention is evaluated only in simulation. On the calibrated grid, 18 of 36 configurations reach the Pareto frontier. Combined methods reach it more often than individual methods, with 9 of 15 combinations versus 9 of 21 single methods. Quality testing changes the winners. AWQ 4bit reduces per token latency to 0.34 t Update (2026-09-17): OBC-Prune: Outcome-Based Calibration for Large Reasoning Model Pruning. arXiv:2609.17890v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) generate long chain-of-thought traces before answering, creating significant inference overhead. Pruning can reduce this cost, but its effectiveness depends on the calibration data used to estimate parameter importance. Recent work calibrates on the model's own rollouts instead of generic dataset, but treats all reasoning tokens uniformly, regardless of whether they contribute to successful reasoning. As a result, pruning protects weights by statistical salience rather than by their contribution to correct reasoning, so weights behind erroneous computation survive as readily as those behind correct computation. These erroneous patterns then get carried into the pruned model, degrading reasoning quality, producing both lower accuracy and longer reasoning traces. We propose Outcome-Based Calibration for Large Reasoning Model Pruning (OBC-Prune) to close this gap. OBC first constructs difficulty-matched pairs of correct and incorrect rollouts from problems the model answers inconsistently. It then estimates the ca Update (2026-09-17): Contiguity, Not Importance: Budgeted Repair of Stale KV Caches After Document Edits. arXiv:2609.17983v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: KV-cache reuse can reduce inference cost in retrieval-augmented generation and agentic systems, but cached contexts may become stale when retrieved knowledge, working memory, or user state is edited. Under causal self-attention, even a local edit can affect downstream KV states. A full re-prefill reliably restores consistency but is costly, whereas refreshing only the edited span can leave downstream dependencies stale. We formulate in-place repair as budgeted recomputation and compare training-free position-selection policies on a factual RAG benchmark with matched direct and derived edits. Across three model families, all policies repair direct cases, but derived cases clearly separate them. At the primary budget, a contiguous edit-local window recovers at least 0.94 of the post-edit answer margin and substantially outperforms attention-based, KV-deviation, and structural selectors. Mechanistic analysis shows that position sets effective under clean-state transplantation can fail under actual recomputation because scattered p Update (2026-09-18): A Unified Evaluation Framework for Trustworthy Large Language Models, Agentic AI, and Multimodal Systems. arXiv:2609.19524v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmark scores alone provide an incomplete basis for assessing the trustworthiness of modern artificial intelligence systems. Large language models (LLMs), agentic systems, and multimodal models (MLLMs) require different forms of assessment, yet their evaluation evidence must remain interpretable for development and oversight. We propose a unified framework that connects output-level, trajectory-level, and cross-modal assessment through eight trustworthiness dimensions: capability, robustness, safety, fairness, transparency, governance, oversight, and efficiency. The framework preserves system-specific metrics while mapping native measurements to common performance bands, accompanied by uncertainty estimates and traceable evidence. A meta-evaluation layer examines the validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the evaluation itself. Multidimensional profiles expose strengths and weaknesses, while safety-critical overrides prevent aggregate scores from masking critical failures. Mappings to governance f