Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2510.22876

Correctness Forensics for Batch Speculative Decoding: Diagnosing the Ragged Tensor Problem

Abstract

Inference optimizations are routinely evaluated by throughput alone, without verifying output correctness. We conduct a forensic analysis of batch speculative decoding and find that several widely-used implementations silently produce corrupted outputs (repetitive tokens, symbols) while reporting competitive speed; failures invisible to metrics like ROUGE. We trace the root cause to the ragged tensor problem: variable token acceptance desynchronizes position IDs, attention masks, and KV-cache across a batch. We formalize the synchronization invariants (rectangular alignment and position-ID contiguity) that valid batched inference must preserve and show that maintaining them incurs superlinear alignment overhead under contiguous layouts. EQSPEC enforces the invariants without custom kernels; EXSPEC schedules same-length sequences to bypass realignment. On SpecBench across three model families, EXSPEC reaches 3 x throughput at batch size 8 with 95% exact match to standard decoding; residual divergence traces to floating-point non-determinism, not synchronization error. Code:https://github.com/eBay/spec_dec

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ranran Haoran Zhang, Soumik Dey, Ashirbad Mishra, Hansi Wu, Binbin Li, Rui Zhang. 2026-08-31. Correctness Forensics for Batch Speculative Decoding: Diagnosing the Ragged Tensor Problem. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22876

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

CyrillicQA: The Influence of Phonetically Encoded Secret Language on LLM Performance

Due to the selection of their training data, large language models (LLMs) perform best on standard-language inputs from languages using the Latin alphabet with large speaker populations, while disadvantaging other language varieties. Nevertheless, they can also be a versatile tool for preserving precisely such endangered languages. But do they also possess the necessary creativity and capacity for abstraction to decode phonetically encoded language the same way humans do?

cs.CL

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

AI Alignment through a Game-theoretic Lens: A Survey

As large language models and increasingly capable AI agents are deployed in high-risk settings, aligning them with complex human values has become a central challenge. Existing alignment methods, while effective in improving helpfulness, harmlessness, and controllability, often struggle to capture real-world preferences that are context-dependent, non-transitive, and shaped by dynamic multi-party interactions. This survey reviews AI alignment through a game-theoretic lens. Specifically, it organizes recent progress around key game-theoretic elements and synthesizes the literature along three challenges: preference diversity, alignment priority, and temporal dynamics. This perspective clarifies where current alignment methods genuinely benefit from game-theoretic analysis, where the framework is looser, and what challenges remain in building robust, adaptive, and verifiable AI systems.

cs.AI