EPIC: Efficient Position-Independent Context Caching for Serving Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are critical for a wide range of applications, but serving them efficiently becomes increasingly challenging as inputs become more complex. Context caching improves serving performance by exploiting inter-request dependency and reusing key-value (KV) cache across requests, thus improving time-to-first-token (TTFT). However, existing prefix-based context caching requires exact token prefix matches, limiting cache reuse in few-shot learning, multi-document QA, or retrieval-augmented generation, where prefixes may vary. In this paper, we present EPIC, an LLM serving system that introduces position-independent context caching (PIC), enabling modular KV cache reuse regardless of token chunk position (or prefix). EPIC features two key designs: AttnLink, which leverages static attention sparsity to minimize recomputation for accuracy recovery, and KVSplit, a customizable chunking method that preserves semantic coherence. Our experiments demonstrate that Epic delivers up to 8x improvements in TTFT and 7x throughput over existing systems, with negligible or no accuracy loss. By addressing the limitations of traditional caching approaches, Epic enables more scalable and efficient LLM inference.

Can LLM be a Personalized Judge?

Ensuring that large language models (LLMs) reflect diverse user values and preferences is crucial as their user bases expand globally. It is therefore encouraging to see the growing interest in LLM personalization within the research community. However, current works often rely on the LLM-as-a-Judge approach for evaluation without thoroughly examining its validity. In this paper, we investigate the reliability of LLM-as-a-Personalized-Judge, asking LLMs to judge user preferences based on personas. Our findings suggest that directly applying LLM-as-a-Personalized-Judge is less reliable than previously assumed, showing low and inconsistent agreement with human ground truth. The personas typically used are often overly simplistic, resulting in low predictive power. To address these issues, we introduce verbal uncertainty estimation into the LLM-as-a-Personalized-Judge pipeline, allowing the model to express low confidence on uncertain judgments. This adjustment leads to much higher agreement (above 80%) on high-certainty samples for binary tasks. Through human evaluation, we find that the LLM-as-a-Personalized-Judge achieves comparable performance to third-party humans evaluation and even surpasses human performance on high-certainty samples. Our work indicates that certainty-enhanced LLM-as-a-Personalized-Judge offers a promising direction for developing more reliable and scalable methods for evaluating LLM personalization.

The Potential and Challenges of Evaluating Attitudes, Opinions, and Values in Large Language Models

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked wide interest in validating and comprehending the human-like cognitive-behavioral traits LLMs may have. These cognitive-behavioral traits include typically Attitudes, Opinions, Values (AOV). However, measuring AOV embedded within LLMs remains opaque, and different evaluation methods may yield different results. This has led to a lack of clarity on how different studies are related to each other and how they can be interpreted. This paper aims to bridge this gap by providing an overview of recent works on the evaluation of AOV in LLMs. Moreover, we survey related approaches in different stages of the evaluation pipeline in these works. By doing so, we address the potential and challenges with respect to understanding the model, human-AI alignment, and downstream application in social sciences. Finally, we provide practical insights into evaluation methods, model enhancement, and interdisciplinary collaboration, thereby contributing to the evolving landscape of evaluating AOV in LLMs.

Can Language Models Recognize Convincing Arguments?

The remarkable and ever-increasing capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have raised concerns about their potential misuse for creating personalized, convincing misinformation and propaganda. To gain insights into LLMs' persuasive capabilities without directly engaging in experimentation with humans, we propose studying their performance on the related task of detecting convincing arguments. We extend a dataset by Durmus & Cardie (2018) with debates, votes, and user traits and propose tasks measuring LLMs' ability to (1) distinguish between strong and weak arguments, (2) predict stances based on beliefs and demographic characteristics, and (3) determine the appeal of an argument to an individual based on their traits. We show that LLMs perform on par with humans in these tasks and that combining predictions from different LLMs yields significant performance gains, even surpassing human performance. The data and code released with this paper contribute to the crucial ongoing effort of continuously evaluating and monitoring the rapidly evolving capabilities and potential impact of LLMs.

Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulations

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable promise in simulating human language use and behavior. In this study, we delve into the intersection of persona variables and the capability of LLMs to simulate different perspectives. We find that persona variables can explain <10\% variance in annotations in existing subjective NLP datasets. Nonetheless, incorporating them via prompting in LLMs provides modest improvement. Persona prompting is most effective on data samples where disagreements among annotators are frequent yet confined to a limited range. A linear correlation exists: the more persona variables influence human annotations, the better LLMs predictions are using persona prompting. However, when the utility of persona variables is low (i.e., explaining <10\% of human annotations), persona prompting has little effect. Most subjective NLP datasets fall into this category, casting doubt on simulating diverse perspectives in the current NLP landscape.

Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases

The surge in popularity of large language models has given rise to concerns about biases that these models could learn from humans. In this study, we investigate whether ingroup solidarity and outgroup hostility, fundamental social biases known from social science, are present in 51 large language models. We find that almost all foundational language models and some instruction fine-tuned models exhibit clear ingroup-positive and outgroup-negative biases when prompted to complete sentences (e.g., "We are..."). A comparison of LLM-generated sentences with human-written sentences on the internet reveals that these models exhibit similar level, if not greater, levels of bias than human text. To investigate where these biases stem from, we experimentally varied the amount of ingroup-positive or outgroup-negative sentences the model was exposed to during fine-tuning in the context of the United States Democrat-Republican divide. Doing so resulted in the models exhibiting a marked increase in ingroup solidarity and an even greater increase in outgroup hostility. Furthermore, removing either ingroup-positive or outgroup-negative sentences (or both) from the fine-tuning data leads to a significant reduction in both ingroup solidarity and outgroup hostility, suggesting that biases can be reduced by removing biased training data. Our findings suggest that modern language models exhibit fundamental social identity biases and that such biases can be mitigated by curating training data. Our results have practical implications for creating less biased large-language models and further underscore the need for more research into user interactions with LLMs to prevent potential bias reinforcement in humans.

The Causal News Corpus: Annotating Causal Relations in Event Sentences from News

Despite the importance of understanding causality, corpora addressing causal relations are limited. There is a discrepancy between existing annotation guidelines of event causality and conventional causality corpora that focus more on linguistics. Many guidelines restrict themselves to include only explicit relations or clause-based arguments. Therefore, we propose an annotation schema for event causality that addresses these concerns. We annotated 3,559 event sentences from protest event news with labels on whether it contains causal relations or not. Our corpus is known as the Causal News Corpus (CNC). A neural network built upon a state-of-the-art pre-trained language model performed well with 81.20% F1 score on test set, and 83.46% in 5-folds cross-validation. CNC is transferable across two external corpora: CausalTimeBank (CTB) and Penn Discourse Treebank (PDTB). Leveraging each of these external datasets for training, we achieved up to approximately 64% F1 on the CNC test set without additional fine-tuning. CNC also served as an effective training and pre-training dataset for the two external corpora. Lastly, we demonstrate the difficulty of our task to the layman in a crowd-sourced annotation exercise. Our annotated corpus is publicly available, providing a valuable resource for causal text mining researchers.

The Multimodal Driver Monitoring Database: A Naturalistic Corpus to Study Driver Attention

A smart vehicle should be able to monitor the actions and behaviors of the human driver to provide critical warnings or intervene when necessary. Recent advancements in deep learning and computer vision have shown great promise in monitoring human behaviors and activities. While these algorithms work well in a controlled environment, naturalistic driving conditions add new challenges such as illumination variations, occlusions and extreme head poses. A vast amount of in-domain data is required to train models that provide high performance in predicting driving related tasks to effectively monitor driver actions and behaviors. Toward building the required infrastructure, this paper presents the multimodal driver monitoring (MDM) dataset, which was collected with 59 subjects that were recorded performing various tasks. We use the Fi- Cap device that continuously tracks the head movement of the driver using fiducial markers, providing frame-based annotations to train head pose algorithms in naturalistic driving conditions. We ask the driver to look at predetermined gaze locations to obtain accurate correlation between the driver's facial image and visual attention. We also collect data when the driver performs common secondary activities such as navigation using a smart phone and operating the in-car infotainment system. All of the driver's activities are recorded with high definition RGB cameras and time-of-flight depth camera. We also record the controller area network-bus (CAN-Bus), extracting important information. These high quality recordings serve as the ideal resource to train various efficient algorithms for monitoring the driver, providing further advancements in the field of in-vehicle safety systems.