SLA-Aware Distributed LLM Inference Across Device-RAN-Cloud
Organizations: Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD)
Abstract
Embodied AI requires sub-second inference near the Radio Access Network (RAN), but deployments span heterogeneous tiers (on-device, RAN-edge, cloud) and must not disrupt real-time baseband processing. We report measurements from a 5G Standalone (SA) AI-RAN testbed using a fixed baseline policy for repeatability. The setup includes an on-device tier, a three-node RAN-edge cluster co-hosting a containerized 5G RAN, and a cloud tier. We find that on-device execution remains multi-second and fails to meet sub-second budgets. At the RAN edge, SLA feasibility is primarily determined by model variant choice: quantized models concentrate below 0.5,s, while unquantized and some larger quantized models incur deadline misses due to stalls and queuing. In the cloud tier, meeting a 0.5,s deadline is challenging on the measured WAN path (up to 32.9% of requests complete within 0.5,s), but all evaluated variants meet a 1.0,s deadline (100% within 1.0,s). Under saturated downlink traffic and up to concurrent inference clients, Multi-Instance GPU (MIG) isolation preserves baseband timing-health proxies, supporting safe co-location under fixed partitioning.
Figures & tables
| Tier | Latency Budget( ) | Guarantees and behavior |
| Premium | s | Reserved MIG slice; strict tail-latency target; may preempt lower tiers |
| Medium | s | Opportunistic access (quantized variants); served when capacity available |
| Basic | s | Best-effort; fallback to on-device/cloud; no exclusivity |
| Item | Setting (this study) |
| UE device | Jetson Orin NX (client); on-device tier runs execute vLLM locally on Jetson (MAXN) |
| Edge tier | 3 GH200 (Red Hat OpenShift), NVIDIA H100 MIG enabled; two nodes: 2 1g.12GB + 1 2g.24GB + 1 3g.48GB; one node: 2 3g.48GB with 1 3g.48GB reserved for Aerial |
| RAN stack | OAI O-CU/O-DU + NVIDIA Aerial 5G low O-DU |
| Cloud tier | AWS Mumbai EC2 (p5.4xlarge, NVIDIA H100) running same serving stack |
| Request cadence | 0.5 s (trace replay), 3 runs per condition |
| Concurrency stress | parallel clients + saturated downlink ( iperf ) |
| On-Device | CPU (W) | GPU (W) |
| 3B-FP16 | 8.05 | 16.14 |
| 3B-AWQ | 6.00 | 11.29 |
| 3B-W4A16 | 6.00 | 11.61 |
| Variant | Platform | Request E2E Mean Std (ms) | TTFT Mean Std (ms) | RTT Mean Std (ms) | Hit (%) @0.5/@1.0 |
| 3B-FP16 | On-Device | 4651 519 | 353 447 | – | 0.0/0.0 |
| Edge | 490 35 | 159 30 | 20.022 6.138 | 73.9/100.0 | |
| Cloud | 559 36 | 300 35 | 84.312 5.702 | 0.4/100.0 | |
| 3B-AWQ | On-Device | 5195 178 | 352 15 | – | 0.0/0.0 |
| Edge | 391 29 | 154 27 | 19.963 6.235 | 98.3/100.0 | |
| Cloud | 529 35 | 298 35 | 83.898 5.517 | 18.3/100.0 |
| SlotInd rate (s -1 ) | U-plane On-time (%) | ||||
| Median | P01 | Min | Median | P05 | |
| 0 | 1999.9 | 1998.9 | 1997.9 | 99.984 | 99.970 |
| 1 | 2000.0 | 1999.0 | 1997.5 | 99.984 | 99.965 |
| 5 | 1999.9 | 1998.9 | 1997.9 | 99.984 | 99.967 |
| 10 | 2000.0 | 1999.0 | 1998.7 | 99.984 | 99.964 |
| 15 | 1999.9 | 1998.9 | 1997.9 | 99.984 | 99.964 |
| Shared-node | Different-node | |||||
| Mean | BLER 95 | HARQ | Mean | BLER 95 | HARQ | |
| (Mb/s) | (%) | (%) | (Mb/s) | (%) | (%) | |
| 0 | 199.9 | 2.79 | 98.40 | 199.9 | 2.79 | 98.40 |
| 1 | 199.3 | 5.56 | 99.70 | 199.9 | 1.18 | 100.00 |
| 5 | 199.4 | 6.69 | 91.28 | 199.8 | 7.01 | 92.00 |
| 10 | 198.1 | 3.09 | 99.46 | 199.2 | 2.75 | 98.78 |
LLM Inference Serving
Large language model inference serving studies how to run model requests efficiently while meeting latency, throughput, cost, and energy goals.
See all 70 papers