PreprintCited by 5

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Fairness in Serving Large Language Models

Sheng, Ying, Cao, Shiyi, Li, Dacheng, Zhu, Banghua, Li, Zhuohan, Zhuo, Danyang, Gonzalez, Joseph E., Stoica, Ion·2024·arXiv

Abstract

High-demand LLM inference services (e.g., ChatGPT and BARD) support a wide range of requests from short chat conversations to long document reading. To ensure that all client requests are processed fairly, most major LLM inference services have request rate limits, to ensure that no client can dominate the request queue. However, this rudimentary notion of fairness also results in under-utilization of the resources and poor client experience when there is spare capacity. While there is a rich literature on fair scheduling, serving LLMs presents new challenges due to their unpredictable request lengths and their unique batching characteristics on parallel accelerators. This paper introduces the definition of LLM serving fairness based on a cost function that accounts for the number of input and output tokens processed. To achieve fairness in serving, we propose a novel scheduling algorithm, the Virtual Token Counter (VTC), a fair scheduler based on the continuous batching mechanism. We prove a 2x tight upper bound on the service difference between two backlogged clients, adhering to the requirement of work-conserving. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the superior performance of VTC in ensuring fairness, especially in contrast to other baseline methods, which exhibit shortcomings under various conditions. The reproducible code is available at https://github.com/Ying1123/VTC-artifact

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2401.00588

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • VTC achieves fair scheduling even when the output length of the request is unknown by tracking token-level resource usage.

    “By tracking token-level resource usage, VTC achieves fair scheduling even when the output length of the request is unknown.”

    From Locality-aware Fair Scheduling in LLM Serving (2025) · cites this paper as [42]

  • Achieving efficient online LLM inference with Service Level Objective (SLO) guarantees necessitates isolation among different clients.

    “Achieving efficient online LLM inference with Service Level Objective (SLO) guarantees necessitates isolation among different clients [42].”

    From Locality-aware Fair Scheduling in LLM Serving (2025) · cites this paper as [42]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sheng, Y., Cao, S., Li, D., Zhu, B., Li, Z., Zhuo, D., Gonzalez, J. E., & Stoica, I.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
References
0
Type
Preprint

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