Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM65745
Volume:
10 |
7 |
Jul 2026
Pages:
1-16
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Independent Researcher
Independent Researcher
Developers want large language models delivered the way modern compute is delivered: deploy a function, call it, pay per use, and never think about machines. But applying the ordinary serverless mental model — a fresh process or virtual machine per invocation — to LLM inference is a category error. An LLM's weights are enormous, shared, long-lived state. Spinning up a new model server per call optimizes the cheap part (the function sandbox) while repeatedly paying the most expensive part (moving tens of gigabytes of weights into accelerator memory). This blueprint resolves that tension with a single organizing idea: be serverless at the API and accounting boundary, but run persistent, shared, model-aware execution cells beneath it. Untrusted function logic runs in a small CPU sandbox that never owns an accelerator; it sends one validated, high-level generation request to a resident inference cell that multiplexes many tenants, owns the model weights and key-value (KV) memory, performs batching, and streams tokens back.
KEYWORDS
The winning system is not "a conventional function platform with a GPU attached." It is a model-residency and token-scheduling platform exposed as functions. Its fast path is created by compiling most functions into safe prompt bytecode, doing static work at deployment, keeping the right weights and prefixes resident, routing straight to the cell most likely to produce the first token soonest, batching only within each request's deadline budget, isolating general user code in CPU microVMs while leaving shared inference outside, reserving resources before accepting work, and streaming immediately while accounting at the point of execution. KVM belongs to the security architecture; shared inference cells provide the execution architecture; and scale-to-zero is a selectable operating mode, not a universal rule. Performance improves through sensible residency, short request paths, fair scheduling, controlled batching, and transparent service classes — never through a single absolute latency promise. Call to action: Begin with the simulator and the single-host hot slice. Establish the latency budget, prove the inference and scheduling thesis on one model and one accelerator, and let measured workload data — not architectural ambition — pace the path to a multiplexed, multi-region, density-optimized platform.
· TTFT (time-to-first-token) — elapsed time from request arrival to the first streamed token. · Prefill — processing the input prompt to populate KV state before decoding begins. · Decode — autoregressive generation of output tokens, one iteration at a time. · KV cache / KV pages — per-sequence key/value attention state; here managed as fixed-size paged allocations. · Prefix cache — reusable KV for a shared leading token sequence, keyed by model, tokenizer, adapter, exact tokens, attention options, and privacy namespace. · Continuous batching — forming and re-forming batches at each model iteration rather than per request. · Inference cell — a persistent, shared execution unit owning weights, KV memory, batching, and sampling for a model version. · Adapter — a small per-function low-rank weight delta applied over a resident base model. · MicroVM — a minimal KVM virtual machine used to isolate untrusted CPU function code (no accelerator, no default network). · Residency — where a model's weights currently live across the HBM → host RAM → NVMe → rack → region hierarchy. · Alias — a mutable atomic pointer (e.g., production) to an immutable function/model version. · Goodput — useful completed work per unit time (distinct from raw throughput).
Publication Date
7/2/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
2
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
76
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...