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

Luyao Gao

dblp:329/0870 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
3as first author
4since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · unresolved

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

Computer networks · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 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.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Cloud and datacenter computing · 55% Distributed systems · 31% Parallel and multicore computing · 14%
Computer networks
1 paper
Edge and fog computing · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Cloud and datacenter computing › inference serving
LLM serving
1.012026
CoSine: Enhancing LLM Serving via Collaborative and Decoupled Speculative Inference · INFOCOM 2026
Distributed systems › distributed machine learning
collaborative inference
0.622026
CoSine: Enhancing LLM Serving via Collaborative and Decoupled Speculative Inference · INFOCOM 2026
Accelerating End-Cloud Collaborative Inference via Near Bubble-Free Pipeline Optimization · INFOCOM 2025
Parallel and multicore computing › task scheduling
pipeline scheduling
0.312025
Accelerating End-Cloud Collaborative Inference via Near Bubble-Free Pipeline Optimization · INFOCOM 2025

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

pipeline optimization · 1.7speculative decoding · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 CoSine: Enhancing LLM Serving via Collaborative and Decoupled Speculative Inference
Luyao Gao, Jianchun Liu, Xichong Zhang, Guoju Gao, Yunming Liao
INFOCOM1
2025 Efficient Dense Diverse Subgraph Search in Attributed Graphs
Luyao Gao, Sijin Wang
WISA1
2025 Accelerating End-Cloud Collaborative Inference via Near Bubble-Free Pipeline Optimization
Luyao Gao, Jianchun Liu, Hongli Xu 0001, Sun Xu, Qianpiao Ma, Liusheng Huang
INFOCOM1
2022 Tracing the spatial-temporal evolution dynamics of air traffic systems using graph theories
abstract
Air traffic systems are of great significance to our society. However, air traffic systems are extremely complicated since an air traffic system encompasses many components which could evolve over time. It is therefore challenging to analyze the evolution dynamics of air traffic systems. In this paper we propose a graph perspective to trace the spatial-temporal evolutions of air traffic systems. Different to existing studies which are model-driven and only focus on certain properties of an air traffic system, in this paper we propose a data-driven perspective and analyze a couple of properties of an air traffic system. Specifically, we model air traffic systems with both unweighted and weighted graphs with respect to real-world traffic data. We then analyze the evolution dynamics of the constructed graphs in terms of nodal degrees, degree distributions, traffic delays, causality between graph structures and traffic delays, and system resilience under airport failures. To validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, a case study on the American air traffic systems with respect to 12-month traffic data is carried out. It is found that the structures and traffic mobilities of the American air traffic systems do not evolve significantly over time, which leads to the stable distributions of the traffic delays as evidenced by a causality analysis. It is further found that the American air traffic systems are quite robust to random airport failures while, respectively, 20% and 10% failures of the hub airports will lead to the collapse of the entire system with respect to the two proposed cascading failure models.
Changhong Hu, Shulin Xiao, Luyao Gao
Int. J. Intell. Syst.3