Luis Gaspar Schroeder, Aditya Desai, Alejandro Cuadron, Kyle Chu, Shu Liu, Mark Zhao, Stephan Krusche, Alfons Kemper, Matei Zaharia, Joseph E. Gonzalez
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Semantic caches return cached responses for semantically similar prompts to reduce LLM inference latency and cost. They embed cached prompts and store them alongside their response in a vector database. Embedding similarity metrics assign a numerical score to quantify the similarity between a request and its nearest neighbor prompt from the cache. Existing systems use the same static similarity threshold across all r ...
equests to determine whether two prompts can share similar responses. However, we observe that static thresholds do not give formal correctness guarantees, result in unexpected error rates, and lead to suboptimal cache hit rates. This paper proposes vCache, the first verified semantic cache with user-defined error rate guarantees for predictable performance. It employs an online learning algorithm to estimate an optimal threshold for each cached prompt, enabling reliable cache responses without additional training. Our experiments show that vCache consistently meets the specified error bounds while outperforming state-of-the-art static-threshold and fine-tuned embedding baselines with up to 12.5$\times$ higher cache hit and 26$\times$ lower error rates. We release the vCache implementation and four benchmarks to support future research.
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
Semantic caches return cached responses for semantically similar prompts to reduce LLM inference latency and cost.
vcache-project/vCache is the closest maintained adjacent implementation (Strong overlap with paper title keywords). It is not paper-verified; validate algorithm and evaluation setup against the paper before trusting reported metrics. Community adoption signal: 68 GitHub stars.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 3 refs, 3 links.
Utility signals: depth 65/100, grounding 75/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Partial overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
These are not paper-verified. Use them as reference points when no direct implementation is available.
Strong overlap with paper title keywords
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Scientific computing
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.