# πŸ“Š InferRoute RouterBench & FrugalGPT Evaluation Summary Inspired by the RouterBench framework (`withmartian/routerbench`) and FrugalGPT cascading LLMs, this report evaluates routing policies on cost, quality, and SLA compliance. We plot the Pareto curves by sweeping the willingness-to-pay ($\lambda$), mixture ratio ($p$), and cascade threshold ($\tau$). --- ## πŸ“ Mathematical Formulation & Evaluation Metrics To guarantee 100% mathematical transparency, all quality retention, latency reduction, and cost metrics are defined below: ### 1. Quality Retention Rate ($\text{Quality}_{\text{retention}}$) $$\text{Quality}_{\text{retention}} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^N S_{\text{routed}}(i)}{\sum_{i=1}^N S_{\text{baseline}}(i)} \times 100\%$$ Where: - $S(i) \in [0.0, 1.0]$ is the evaluation score for query $i$: - **Code Generation**: Automated AST parsing & pytest unit test pass rate. - **Structured Extraction**: JSON Schema validation pass rate ($1.0$ if valid JSON matching schema, $0.0$ if invalid). - **Math Reasoning**: Exact match check against ground-truth numeric solution. - **General QA**: Semantic accuracy score evaluated via LLM-as-a-Judge. ### 2. Pricing Baselines & Cost Savings Formulation $$\text{Cost}_{\text{Baseline}} = \sum_{i=1}^{N} \left( \frac{\text{Tokens}_{\text{in}, i}}{10^6} \times \$5.00 + \frac{\text{Tokens}_{\text{out}, i}}{10^6} \times \$15.00 \right)$$ $$\text{Cost}_{\text{InferRoute}} = \sum_{i=1}^{N} \left( \frac{\text{Tokens}_{\text{in}, i}}{10^6} \times P_{\text{in}}(M_i) + \frac{\text{Tokens}_{\text{out}, i}}{10^6} \times P_{\text{out}}(M_i) \right) \times (1 - \text{CacheHit}_i \times 0.35)$$ $$\text{Spend Saved \%} = \frac{\text{Cost}_{\text{Baseline}} - \text{Cost}_{\text{InferRoute}}}{\text{Cost}_{\text{Baseline}}} \times 100\%$$ ### Commercial Price Tiers Reference | Model | Provider | Input / 1M Tokens | Output / 1M Tokens | Traffic Allocation | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **GPT-4o** *(Baseline)* | OpenAI | $5.00 | $15.00 | 9.0% (Complex reasoning / failover) | | **GPT-4o-mini** | OpenAI | $0.15 | $0.60 | 42.0% (Summarization / QA) | | **Gemini-1.5-Flash** | Google | $0.075 | $0.30 | 31.0% (Structured JSON extraction) | | **vLLM / Llama-3** | Local GPU | $0.00 | $0.00 | 18.0% (Quant.ai strategy parsing) | --- ## 🌐 Dataset Sources (`streaming=True`) Prompts are streamed directly via Hugging Face Datasets Server without downloading local 15GB files: 1. **`allenai/WildChat-4.8M`**: 3,684 real ChatGPT user conversations (unstructured real traffic). 2. **`tatsu-lab/alpaca`**: 2,500 category-labeled instructions (ground-truth task benchmark). 3. **`gsm8k`**: 2,500 math reasoning problems. 4. **`mbpp`**: 1,316 Python coding problems. --- ## πŸ”¬ Concrete Per-Prompt Evaluation Examples (ε…¨ζ΅η¨‹ζ΅‹θ―•θŒƒδΎ‹) ### πŸ”Ή Example 1: Real User Conversation (`allenai/WildChat-4.8M`) - **Prompt**: `"Can you write a detailed analysis comparing the memory management strategies of Rust vs C++ with concrete code examples?"` - **Source**: `huggingface.co/datasets/allenai/WildChat-4.8M` (Row #1042) - **Classifier Output**: Category = `General Instruction / Programming Analysis` | Complexity Score = `0.42` - **Routing Decision**: Dispatched to Tier-1 Cheap Model `gpt-4o-mini` - **Validation**: Passed memory layout check & lifetime description check (Score = `1.0`) - **Token Breakdown**: Input = 38 tokens | Output = 420 tokens - **Cost Calculation**: - Baseline GPT-4o Cost: $(38 \times 5.0 + 420 \times 15.0) / 10^6 = \$0.006490$ - InferRoute Cost (`gpt-4o-mini`): $(38 \times 0.15 + 420 \times 0.60) / 10^6 = \$0.000258$ - **Savings**: **96.0% Cost Reduction** | Quality Retention: **100.0%** ### πŸ”Ή Example 2: Python Code Generation with Automated Unit Test (`mbpp`) - **Prompt**: `"Write a Python function find_longest_palindromic_substring(s: str) -> str using dynamic programming."` - **Source**: `huggingface.co/datasets/mbpp` (Row #84) - **Classifier Output**: Category = `Code Generation / AST Unit Test` | Complexity Score = `0.85` - **Routing Execution**: 1. *Step 1*: Routed to local GPU model `vLLM (Llama-3-8B-Instruct)` 2. *Step 2 (Validation)*: Executed pytest AST validator -> *Failed (IndexError on single-char string)* 3. *Step 3 (Speculative Escalation)*: Automatically escalated mid-stream to Tier-2 `gpt-4o` 4. *Step 4 (Final Validation)*: Re-executed unit tests -> *Passed (10/10 tests passed, Score = 1.0)* - **Cost Calculation**: - Baseline GPT-4o Cost: $\$0.004800$ - InferRoute Cost (Escalated to `gpt-4o`): $\$0.004800$ - **Savings**: **0.0% (Escalated to protect quality)** | Quality Retention: **100.0% (Prevented Bug)** --- ## πŸ“ˆ Curve Efficiency: AIQ (Area Under the Trade-off Curve) AIQ measures the average quality efficiency score of a router across its swept cost range (normalized AUC, bounded between 0% and 100%). Higher is better. | Routing Curve | AIQ Score (Normalized AUC) | Description | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Oracle Router Upper Bound** | *Theoretical Optimal* | Represents the perfect offline selection. | | **Cascade Router (FrugalGPT)** | 61.1% | Server-side cascading model escalation. | | **KNN Router** | 66.0% | Jaccard similarity nearest-neighbor routing. | | **MLP Router** | 64.8% | Content-aware classifier routing. | | **Zero Router Baseline** | 64.5% | Non-content-aware random model mixture. |