TELLER: Non-intrusive Cross-Layer Root-Cause Analysis for LLM Inference

Cloud-hosted large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for root cause analysis (RCA) in AIOps pipelines, but they introduce data privacy risk, network latency, and per-query cost that scale poorly with production log volumes. We present TriCalRAG, a benchmark evaluating open-weight LLMs served locally via vLLM on a single high-memory workstation GPU (NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000, 96GB) against a classical LSTM-based log anomaly detector (DeepLog), across four real, publicly available log datasets (BGL, HDFS, Thunderbird, OpenStack). We evaluate two open-weight models (Qwen2.5-14B, Mistral-Small) under three prompting strategies: zero-shot, few-shot, and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) over a labeled incident history, reporting accuracy, precision/recall, and F1 with bootstrap 95% confidence intervals across 3 random seeds, alongside throughput and VRAM footprint. Our results show that RAG not only improves mean F1 by 0.10-0.27 over zero-shot prompting but, more importantly, substantially stabilizes model calibration: zero-shot prompting drives both models toward near-degenerate behavior (predicting "anomaly" on up to 100% of incidents on some datasets), while RAG keeps predicted-positive rates close to the true class balance in the majority of configurations. Mistral-Small achieves higher macro-averaged F1 than Qwen2.5-14B (0.644 vs. 0.560) but exhibits calibration failures in more configurations (7 vs. 5 of 12), while running at roughly half the throughput - indicating the better model choice depends on whether a deployment prioritizes peak accuracy or predictable behavior across prompting conditions. Ablations show batching scales throughput 41 times on a single card and that 4-bit quantization reduces latency 20% with no measurable accuracy loss. We release our benchmark harness, dataset splits, and evaluation code to support reproducible on-premise AIOps research.

LLM inference and serving systems have become security-critical infrastructure; however, many of their most concerning failures arise from the serving layer rather than from model behavior alone. Modern inference engines combine KV cache, batching, prefix sharing, speculative decoding, adapters, and multi-tenant scheduling, creating shared-state behavior that only emerges under realistic concurrent workloads and is missed by standard model, safety, and API tests. We present GRIEF, a greybox fuzzer for LLM inference engines that treats timed multi-request traces as first-class inputs, uses lightweight oracles to detect crashes, hangs, performance pathologies, and silent output corruption, and applies controlled replay with log-probability checks to confirm reproducible serving-layer failures. Across early campaigns on vLLM and SGLang, GRIEF discovers 15 vulnerabilities, 10 confirmed by engine developers, including 2 CVEs, spanning KV-cache isolation failures, cross-request performance interference, and crash or liveness bugs. These results show that concurrency, caching, and state reuse can induce silent cross-request contamination, noisy-neighbor denial of service, and delayed crashes without malformed inputs or explicit server errors, making concurrent serving behavior a first-class security and reliability boundary for LLM infrastructure.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance across diverse tasks, their inference dynamics remain poorly understood because of the limited resolution of existing analysis tools. In this work, we identify an intrinsic magnification mechanism in transformer architectures: deeper layers inherently magnify the small changes of layer-wise confidence, providing a fine-grained confidence trajectory. Building on this insight, we introduce HyperLens, a high-resolution probe designed to trace confidence trajectories and quantify the cognitive effort during inference. Across LLMs and datasets, HyperLens reveals a consistent divergence in confidence trajectories that separates complex from simple tasks. We abstract this pattern into a quantitative cognitive effort metric. Our analysis reveals a fundamental principle: complex tasks consistently require higher cognitive effort. Finally, we provide a mechanistic diagnosis of a common side effect of standard Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT): it can reduce cognitive effort and consequently degrade performance on in-domain tasks.