Who Pays for Efficient Inference? Confidence-Based Small-to-Large LLM Routing Across Tasks and Languages

Selecting the appropriate model at inference time -- the routing problem -- requires jointly optimizing output quality, cost, latency, and governance constraints. Existing approaches delegate this decision to LLM-based classifiers or preference-trained routers that are themselves costly and high-latency, reducing a multi-objective optimization to single-dimensional quality prediction. We argue that small language models (SLMs, 1-4B parameters) have now achieved sufficient reasoning capability for sub-second, zero-marginal-cost, self-hosted task classification, potentially making the routing decision negligible in the inference budget. We test this thesis on a six-label taxonomy through two studies. Study 1 is a harmonized offline benchmark of Phi-3.5-mini, Qwen2.5-1.5B, and Qwen-2.5-3B on identical Azure T4 hardware, serving stack, quantization, and a fixed 60-case corpus. Qwen-2.5-3B achieves the best exact-match accuracy (0.783), the strongest latency-accuracy tradeoff, and the only nonzero accuracy on all six task families. Study 2 is a pre-registered four-arm randomized experiment under synthetic traffic with an effective sample size of 60 unique cases per arm, comparing Phi-4-mini, Qwen-2.5-3B, and DeepSeek-V3 against a no-routing control. DeepSeek-V3 attains the highest accuracy (0.830) but fails the pre-registered P95 latency gate (2,295 ms); Qwen-2.5-3B is Pareto-dominant among self-hosted models (0.793 accuracy, 988 ms median, $0 marginal cost). No model meets the standalone viability criterion (>=0.85 accuracy, <=2,000 ms P95). The cost and latency prerequisites for SLM-based routing are met; the accuracy gap of 6-8 percentage points and the untested question of whether correct classification translates to downstream output quality bound the remaining distance to production viability.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized inference across diverse natural language tasks, with larger models performing better but at higher computational costs. We propose a confidence-driven strategy that dynamically selects the most suitable model based on confidence estimates. By assessing a model's confidence in handling the task and response accuracy, tasks that are likely to be solved correctly are retained, while more uncertain or complex cases are delegated to a larger model, ensuring reliability while minimizing computation. Specifically, we evaluate a model's likelihood of knowing the correct answer and the probability that its response is accurate. Experiments on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark show that our approach achieves accuracy comparable to the largest model while reducing computational costs by 20% to 40%. When applied to GPT-4o API calls, it reduces token usage by approximately 60%, further improving cost efficiency. These findings indicate the potential of confidence-based model selection to enhance real-world LLM deployment, particularly in resource-constrained settings such as edge devices and commercial API applications.

Large language models (LLMs) differ in capabilities and costs, motivating routing methods that adaptively choose a model for each query. These methods rely on performance prediction: given a query, estimate whether a model will answer it correctly. Most routing methods train separate predictors of candidate models' performance to guide model selection. Our work shows that performance prediction only beats a simple baseline when the candidate model is suboptimal on the task or the performance predictor adds significant capacity relative to the candidate model. Specifically, we take a model's self-confidence, the probability it assigns to its chosen answer, as a baseline and study how much a performance predictor can improve on it. First, we show that any performance predictor that outperforms a model's self-confidence can be used to improve the model's loss: the predictor's advantage transfers exactly in log loss through recalibration. Second, accounting for the predictor's additional parameters, we bound its advantage by the model's suboptimality plus the gain from those parameters. Third, we extend our theoretical results to two-model cascades, which route queries to a more capable model when the first model is predicted to fail. Experiments with 16 language models on four benchmarks show that predictors gain a larger advantage over self-confidence on more suboptimal models. This advantage shrinks as models improve through finetuning. Cascading exhibits the same two patterns: predictor-based routing offers larger gains over confidence-based routing for more suboptimal models, and these gains diminish after finetuning.