cs.MAMay 20, 2026

Argo: Efficient Importance Labeling for Enterprise Email Systems

Authors: Siddhant RayGanesh AnanthanarayananKevin ChianYan GuoCristina St HillJack W. StokesVictor WangJunchen Jiang

Organizations: University of Chicago · Microsoft · University of Chicago / TensorMesh

Abstract

Email importance labeling has long been a critical yet challenging problem for businesses and individuals. Traditional approaches; such as keyword matching, user-defined rules, and sender-based heuristics; demand extensive manual feature engineering and fail to scale effectively or generalize. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong potential and a natural fit for this task, offering deep contextual understanding and superior labeling quality. However, using LLM models like GPT-4.1 at enterprise email volumes incurs prohibitive computational costs and hinders real-world deployment. We explore the trade-off space of using alternative labeling schemes as opposed to GPT4.1 scale LLMs, with the goal of achieving near GPT level labeling quality with significantly lower cost. We develop Argo, an enterprise email labeling framework, where we construct a profiler to efficiently search the cost quality trade-off space of labeling and identify cost-efficient alternatives to labeling emails. Additionally, we design an on-demand provisioning scheme to intelligently scale Argo with real time load, to minimize cost increases during peak load inference. Over 3 open-source email datasets, Argo achieves 148-167X inference cost reduction with negligible quality degradation and 20-640000X lower profiling costs, making large-scale, context-aware email labeling practical for enterprises.

Explore similar work

Jun 27, 2026cs.CL

Labeling Training Data for Entity Matching Using Large Language Models

Recent large language models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on entity matching without requiring task-specific training data. However, applying these models to large sets of candidate pairs remains slow and costly. In contrast, entity matchers using traditional machine learning methods or small language models (SLMs), such as RoBERTa, offer much faster inference but require task-specific training data. This paper investigates whether the need to provide task-specific training data can be avoided by using knowledge-distillation workflows, in which an LLM serves as a teacher model to label training pairs that are subsequently used to train a smaller student model. We investigate knowledge distillation for entity matching along the following dimensions: pair-selection strategy, teacher model, label post-processing method, and student model. We evaluate the workflows using the Abt-Buy, Walmart-Amazon, WDC Products, DBLP-ACM, and DBLP-Scholar benchmarks, and compare the performance of student models trained with machine-labeled data to the performance of the same models trained using the benchmark training sets. Our experiments show that student models trained using the machine-labeled sets perform approximately on par with models trained on the benchmark training sets, with the remaining differences in both directions staying below two F1 points. Using GPT-5.2 to label the training sets for all five benchmarks costs US$28.31 to US$40.88, whereas manually labeling the same training sets is estimated to require 470 hours of work. At inference time, Ditto is 41.5 to 534 times faster than directly using an LLM to perform the matching tasks. These results indicate that current LLMs, when combined with a suitable pair-selection method, can substantially reduce or even eliminate the manual effort required to label use case-specific training data for entity matching.
Aaron Steiner, Christian Bizer
Jun 25, 2026cs.PF

Cluster, Route, Escalate: Cascaded Framework for Cost-Aware LLM Serving

Efficient deployment of large language models (LLMs) in production forces a trade-off between accuracy and cost. Operators often default to a single model that is either expensive for easy queries or insufficient for hard ones. To address this challenge, we propose a two-stage cascaded solution. Stage 1 clusters incoming queries and assigns each cluster to its most cost-effective model. The cost budget for this routing process is set by an interpretable hyperparameter, tuned offline. Stage 2 adds a quality estimation (QE) cascade; when an output from Stage 1 is judged low-quality, the query is escalated to a stronger model. This ensures only hard or low-confidence cases reach the expensive models. On the test datasets, the cascaded system retains 97-99% of the strongest model's accuracy while reducing Time Per Output Token (TPOT). It requires only task-correctness labels and adapts to changes in the model pool without manual reconfiguration.
Yasmin Moslem, Magdalena Kacmajor, Vasudevan Nedumpozhimana +11
Dec 5, 2025cs.DB

Poodle: Seamlessly Scaling Down Large Language Models with Just-in-Time Model Replacement

Businesses increasingly rely on large language models (LLMs) to automate simple repetitive tasks instead of developing custom machine learning models. LLMs require few, if any, training examples and can be utilized by users without expertise in model development. However, this comes at the cost of substantially higher resource and energy consumption compared to smaller models, which often achieve similar predictive performance for simple tasks. In this paper, we present our vision for just-in-time model replacement (JITR), where, upon identifying a recurring task in calls to an LLM, the model is replaced transparently with a cheaper alternative that performs well for this specific task. JITR retains the ease of use and low development effort of LLMs, while saving significant cost and energy. We discuss the main challenges in realizing our vision regarding the identification of recurring tasks and the creation of a custom model. Specifically, we argue that model search and transfer learning will play a crucial role in JITR to efficiently identify and fine-tune models for a recurring task. Using our JITR prototype Poodle, we reduce inference time by up to 7.5x compared to a self- hosted LLM and save more than $2,200 per 1M requests compared to a flagship hosted LLM, while achieving accuracy competitive with the LLM baseline.
Nils Strassenburg, Boris Glavic, Tilmann Rabl