RetryRoute finds a retry after a failure succeeds only 17 to 53 percent as often as a first try, and routes around it
AspireAI community · arXiv (cs.LG)
Web agents that edit images call open editing models in a critique-and-retry loop, and those models differ in cost by more than an order of magnitude, so a service must decide after each rejected edit whether to retry the same model, escalate to another or give up. Existing routers pick one model per request and cascades escalate in a fixed order, treating a retry as an independent draw. The paper's measurement is the finding: across six open models, three benchmarks and two judges, a retry after a failure succeeds only 17-53 percent as often as a first try, a pattern the authors call sticky failures. RetryRoute is a retry-aware router that estimates each model's chance of success given the request's failure history, plans retries, escalations and abandonment over failure states, and folds live queue waits into the cost so the same plan becomes load-aware dispatch. At the main budget it exceeds the strongest of eleven prior baselines by 2.8 points on average over eight groups, and on a GPU serving testbed it raises the share of edits delivered within the service-level objective by 5.0-6.3 points at every load.
Read the story and explore more from the AspireAI community.
Two sparse-autoencoder analyses have resisted scaling: matching semantically similar features across layers, and compressing large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes. This paper argues both are the same underlying problem, estimating semantic distances between SAE features that sit on different activation manifolds. Its representation treats each feature not as a single decoder vector but as an activation-weighted distribution over the hidden states expressing it, projects those distributions into a shared reference space, and compares them with Wasserstein distance. The representation is proved invariant to activation rescaling and stable under perturbation, and recovers true matches under finite-sample margin conditions. Empirically it outperformed decoder-vector and LLM-based baselines and captured subtle functional distinctions between related features, and it compressed large feature circuits into interpretable supernodes automatically. The limitation is that this is interpretability tooling: the paper demonstrates better feature matching and circuit compression, not that downstream interpretability claims become more accurate.