The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has created a diverse landscape of models, each excelling at different tasks. This diversity drives researchers to employ multiple LLMs in practice, leaving behind valuable multi-LLM log data. This naturally leads to the question of whether such logs can be fully leveraged to fuse LLMs' complementary capabilities. Although prior work has explored various strategies for integrating multiple LLMs, we argue that practical fusion must meet two essential requirements: (1) compatibility with real-world serving scenarios (e.g., local and API-based serving), and (2) flexibility to operate at different stages of the LLM pipeline to meet varied user needs (e.g., fine-tuning and inference stages). To this end, we introduce LLMFusionBench, a large-scale benchmark for LLM fusion that spans 14 tasks across five domains, with responses from 20 open-source LLMs (8B--671B) totaling 103M tokens. Building on LLMFusionBench, we propose FusionFactory, a systematic framework with three elaborated levels: (1) query-level fusion via tailored LLM routers, (2) thought-level fusion leveraging retrieved abstract reasoning templates, and (3) model-level fusion via distillation from top-ranked responses. Experiments show that FusionFactory consistently outperforms the best individual LLM across all 14 benchmarks, with the optimal fusion configuration varying across benchmarks, highlighting the promise of multi-LLM log data as a practical foundation for fusing diverse LLM capabilities.
Leveraging multiple specialized LLMs can combine complementary strengths, but existing approaches trade adaptability for stability: routing commits prematurely, heuristic ensembling depends on fragile proxies, and parameter merging introduces interference. We propose DLLG (Dynamic Logit-Level Gating), a dynamic logit-level ensembling framework that learns token-level expert fusion from sparse response-level supervision. A lightweight gating module predicts step-wise fusion weights, linking trajectory-level correctness to generation without token-level labels or expert retraining. Across diverse reasoning and code benchmarks, DLLG consistently outperforms strong routing, heuristic ensembling, and parameter-merging baselines across model scales, highlighting learned logit-level fusion as a robust and scalable paradigm for integrating specialized experts.
Can large language models with substantially different parameter spaces be merged by direct weighted averaging, without training or semantic alignment? Existing heterogeneous fusion methods typically introduce distillation, adapters, learned latent spaces, routing, or feature alignment, leaving open whether a simpler recipe can work for genuinely different billion-parameter checkpoints. We revisit this counterintuitive question through training-free dimensional adaptation followed by ratio-controlled interpolation. In union-style merging, we expand the smaller model into the larger parameter space; in intersection-style merging, we truncate the larger model into the smaller parameter space. Across Qwen-family model pairs and benchmarks covering mathematical reasoning, code generation, language understanding, commonsense reasoning, knowledge, and instruction following, deterministic expansion largely preserves the source model function, and small-ratio interpolation can improve over strong source checkpoints by transferring complementary capabilities. However, near-balanced interpolation often collapses, and task-level results reveal a seesaw effect in which gains on some capabilities coexist with regressions on others. These results show that simple parameter averaging, when paired with lightweight dimensional adaptation and carefully controlled ratios, is a surprisingly strong baseline for heterogeneous LLM merging, suggesting that the limits of direct weighted fusion may also bound what more complex heterogeneous merging methods can achieve at scale.
Data fusion, also known as truth discovery, is a data integration problem that aims to determine the correct value or set of values for each attribute of an object when presented with potentially conflicting values from multiple sources. Data fusion tasks belong to two main categories: single-truth scenarios, where each attribute has only one correct value, and multi-truth scenarios, where multiple values can be valid simultaneously. This paper investigates the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in data fusion tasks for tabular data. Various prompting strategies, encompassing both single-truth and multi-truth scenarios, are investigated empirically. Domain-dependent, domain-independent, zero-shot and one-shot prompts are evaluated on three different benchmark datasets. Experimental results demonstrate that LLM-based approaches outperform traditional unsupervised truth discovery methods, such as DART and LTM, across all datasets. The codebase of this study has been made publicly available on GitHub.