Cited by 0IoT and Edge/Fog ComputingCloud Computing and Resource ManagementSoftware System Performance and Reliability

TimelyLLM: Time-sensitive LLM Serving System for Physical-I/O Limited Agents

Open access
Ling, Neiwen, Chen, Guojun, Khandelwal, Anurag, Zhong, Lin·2026·Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into Physical-I/O limited agents, such as robots and voice assistants, which execute outputs sequentially. However, existing LLM serving systems typically employ a throughput-oriented batching mechanism, ignoring the large gap between LLM generation speed and the constrained physical I/O rates of agents, thus wasting execution slack and worsening resource contention. Besides, they treat all tokens equally and cannot anticipate the execution implications of different content, preventing scheduling aligned with agent-side behavior. To address it, we propose a new system named TimelyLLM that coordinates LLM generation with the physical behavior of agents. TimelyLLM introduces a novel segmented generation and scheduling mechanism, strategically leveraging the time gap between agent plan generation and execution to reduce contention and improve response latency under multi-agent workloads. We implement TimelyLLM on top of a widely-used LLM serving framework. We also build a dataset collection system to construct serving workloads from real-world robots, including drones, robot arms, and quadruped robots. Our evaluation demonstrates that TimelyLLM improves the time utility up to 1.52×, and reduces the overall waiting time by 84%.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3745756.3809203

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Ling, N., Chen, G., Khandelwal, A., & Zhong, L.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 24th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services
Publisher
ACM
Published
2026-06-20
Pages
261-278
OpenAlex
W7162787177
Cited by
0
References
3
FWCI
0.00
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Science Foundation (2112562)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software System Performance and Reliability
Keywords
large language model inference, robotic agents, voice assistants, response latency, resource contention, unmanned aerial vehicles, robot manipulators, quadruped robot

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review