Papers for

cloud ai service providers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Permutation shuffling fails to protect model secrecy in encrypted AI inference

Shuffling is Not Enough: Breaking Permutation-Based Model Confidentiality in Hybrid FHE Inference

Abstract: Hybrid fully homomorphic encryption~(FHE) inference improves the practicality of private inference by letting the server evaluate linear layers homomorphically while the client decrypts and applies nonlinearities. Recent schemes attempt to protect model confidentiality by returning noisy, output-permuted responses and appealing to shuffle-model differential privacy~(DP). We show that this protection fails in the correctness regime required by hybrid FHE systems. For a $d$-input linear layer, $d+1$ admissible queries suffice for exact recovery of a permutation-invariant layer summary, hence for perfect model distinguishability. We further show that input DP is orthogonal to model confidentiality and that the local-DP premise required for shuffle amplification cannot hold under correctness-bounded noise. We recover all linear layers of a \safhire{}-style ResNet-20 end-to-end from TFHE transcripts with zero error, using $d+1$ queries per layer for a total of $5{,}712$ direct queries. Under the same query model, we also confirm exact per-layer recovery on pretrained ImageNet-scale CNNs and ViT-B/16. The leaked spectra enable fingerprinting, lineage attribution, and improved logit-based extraction, while suppressing them destroys inference utility.

Fri 11 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
This paper shows that simply mixing up (shuffling) the outputs of an encrypted AI model is not enough to keep its details secret during private computations. The authors demonstrate that an attacker can recover key parts of a model’s inner workings with only a small number of cleverly chosen queries. They prove that the usual noise added to protect privacy cannot fully hide the model without ruining accuracy. Their methods work on popular neural networks, revealing model details perfectly in tests.
Open 2609.12911v1

Datacenter GPUs save power with model-specific phase-adjusted control

Phase-Decoupled, Model-Calibrated Power Control for Disaggregated LLM Serving

Abstract: Datacenter GPU power is the binding constraint on LLM serving capacity, and production serving has shifted to prefill/decode (PD) disaggregation. Deploying NVIDIA's Max-Q inference profile on a disaggregated B200 system, we found its realized gain modest (+8.6% tokens/J), model-dependent, and carrying a mean end-to-end latency cost (+5.2%) that throughput-only evaluation does not surface; the profile also applies one setting to prefill and decode GPUs that operate in opposite hardware regimes. We hypothesize that the optimal power setting is a property of the deployed (model, quantization, engine, hardware) combination rather than of the GPU class, that each lane warrants its own profile, and that converting SLO headroom into energy safely requires latency-gated calibration under a runtime SLO guard rather than a fixed recipe. We present a phase-decoupled, model-calibrated controller: the prefill lane runs under an SM-clock window whose floor is a latency guarantee by construction, and the decode lane under a power cap placed by automatic calibration just above a measured throughput/latency cliff. Because a disaggregated decode lane draws flat, memory-bound power, the cap binds continuously, the reactive-overshoot weakness that led POLCA to reject capping is absent, and the GPU's own power manager retains throughput under the cap. On an 8x B200 node serving Qwen3-Coder-480B (FP8) under agentic load, our balanced mode delivers +20.4% tokens/J at +3.5% mean e2e versus +8.6% at +5.2% for Max-Q, a Pareto improvement on both axes. On Qwen3-235B-A22B (NVFP4) every operating mode meets the ITL-p99 SLO in every repetition; both vendor profiles miss it. A decode-actuator A/B shows the calibrated cap beats static clock locks, and a three-day sustained run saves 32.3% of a lane pair's electricity. Both models are MoE; a dense model recovers roughly 5x less, so we scope our claims to MoE serving.

Thu 10 SeptMachine LearningDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing
The gist
Running large AI language models in datacenters uses a lot of GPU power, which limits how many requests they can handle. The authors found that using a fixed power setting for all parts of the AI task wastes energy or slows things down. They designed a new system that sets power limits separately for each task phase, calibrated to the AI model and latency needs. This method saved up to 20% energy per output token while keeping response times fast, especially for certain model types.
Open 2609.11133v1

Hyperparameter rules adapt to model sparsity for mixture-of-experts

Hyperparameter Scaling Laws Across MoE Sparsity

Abstract: Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models expand model capacity without a proportional increase in training compute, but increasing sparsity makes reliable hyperparameter transfer challenging. In this work, we show that conventional hyperparameter scaling laws are insufficient for ultra-sparse MoEs: the optimal learning rate and batch size vary with activation ratio, and these shifts cannot be explained by either total or activated parameter count alone. To characterize this dependence, we conduct 1,800 pre-training runs spanning six activated-parameter scales and models with up to 6B total non-embedding parameters, processing approximately 20 trillion tokens at a cost of 200,000 equivalent H800 GPU-hours. Our results reconcile conflicting findings in prior work by revealing two scaling regimes. At fixed sparsity, the optimal batch size follows a power-law relationship with training tokens $D$, whereas the optimal learning rate scales with training compute $C$ and remains robust to the allocation between model size and data. Across sparsity levels, the activation ratio $A$ enters both relationships as an additional multiplicative power-law factor. These observations lead to unified hyperparameter scaling laws that transfer across MoE sparsity levels. Large-scale evaluation shows that the scaling form outperforms alternative functional forms. On a held-out ultra-sparse MoE with 12B total parameters and only 1/64 of its experts activated, the predicted hyperparameters remain close to the observed optima, supporting joint extrapolation across model scale and sparsity. Further experiments demonstrate transfer across expert granularities and isolate the effect of activation ratio from that of total expert count.

Tue 8 SeptMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Training large AI models with many parts activated only some of the time (called sparsity) is tricky because the usual settings for learning speed and batch size don't work well. The authors ran many experiments and found that how often parts of the model activate changes the best training settings in predictable ways. They created formulas that help pick good learning speeds and batch sizes no matter how sparse the model is. This helps make training these big sparse models more reliable and efficient.
Open 2609.08690v1