LLMForge: Multi-Backend Hardware-Aware Neural Architecture Search with Infinite-Head Attention for Edge Language Models

May 17, 2026 ยท Grace Period ยท + Add venue

โณ Grace Period
This paper is less than 90 days old. We give authors time to release their code before passing judgment.
Authors Xinting Jiang, Junyi Luo, Ruichen Qi, Kauna Lei, Ben Laurie, Gregory Kielian, Mehdi Saligane arXiv ID 2605.17653 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 0
Abstract
Sub-billion-parameter Transformer language models are increasingly deployed on edge devices, where the privacy, latency, and operating-cost advantages of on-device inference are constrained by tight memory-bandwidth, energy, and thermal budgets that make architectural choice and accelerator-specific cost central to efficient inference. We present LLMForge, a hardware-aware neural architecture search (NAS) framework whose three composable contributions together make edge-LM architecture search hardware-conditioned, since different substrates impose different hardware cost bottlenecks. Infinite-Head Attention (IHA) decouples the number of query heads, KV groups, and per-head query/key and value dimensions, expanding the feasible per-layer attention configuration space by approximately 400x over grouped-query attention within our search-space ranges. Forge-Former, an encoder-based surrogate for ranking architectural candidates, outperforms MLP and random-forest baselines. Forge-DSE, an NSGA-II-based design-space-exploration engine, pairs Forge-Former with a multi-backend hardware cost model spanning GPUs, systolic accelerators, and ring-dataflow edge accelerators. Across four different hardware substrates, the searches converge to visibly different architectures whose shapes track each substrate's cost bottleneck. On the multi-chip ring substrate, our co-search returns three 300M-scale deployment-aware variants on the Pareto front. Each is re-trained on FineWeb-Edu-10BT under matched recipe against SmolLM2-360M and Qwen-0.5B architecture baselines. The accurate variant has the lowest validation loss 2.798 and competitive benchmark performance with fewer parameters, the energy-optimized variant lowers energy per token by 40%, and the latency-optimized variant lowers TTFT and TPOT by 43%.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning