Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Yangzhen Wu

dblp:384/7525 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Language models and text generation · 25% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 25% Planning, search and constraint satisfaction · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model inference
inference scaling laws
0.912025
Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for LLM Problem-Solving · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods › ensemble learning
majority voting
0.912025
Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for LLM Problem-Solving · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning
statistical inference
0.912025
Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for LLM Problem-Solving · ICLR 2025
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Planning, search and constraint satisfaction
tree search
0.912025
Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for LLM Problem-Solving · ICLR 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

weighted voting · 0.9tree search · 0.9greedy search · 0.9best-of-n · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for LLM Problem-Solving
abstract
While the scaling laws of large language models (LLMs) training have been extensively studied, optimal inference configurations of LLMs remain underexplored. We study inference scaling laws (aka test-time scaling laws) and compute-optimal inference, focusing on the trade-offs between model sizes and generating additional tokens with different inference strategies. As a first step towards understanding and designing compute-optimal inference methods, we studied cost-performance trade-offs for inference strategies such as greedy search, majority voting, best-of-$n$, weighted voting, and two different tree search algorithms, using different model sizes and compute budgets. Our findings suggest that scaling inference compute with inference strategies can be more computationally efficient than scaling model parameters. Additionally, smaller models combined with advanced inference algorithms offer Pareto-optimal trade-offs in cost and performance. For example, the Llemma-7B model, when paired with our novel tree search algorithm, consistently outperforms the Llemma-34B model across all tested inference strategies on the MATH benchmark. We hope these insights contribute to a deeper understanding of inference scaling laws (test-time scaling laws) for LLMs.
Yangzhen Wu, Zhiqing Sun, Shanda Li, Sean Welleck, Yiming Yang 0002
ICLR1