Paper detail

Reliability Under Randomness: An Empirical Analysis of Sparse and Dense Language Models Across Decoding Temperatures

The increasing prevalence of sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures in large language models raises important questions regarding their reliability under stochastic decoding. While conditional computation enables substantial gains in computational efficiency, it remains unclear whether the interaction between sparse routing and temperature-based sampling compromises output stability relative to dense architectures. This work investigates whether conditional computation in MoE models amplifies decoding-induced randomness, leading to reduced reliability as temperature increases. We evaluate three representative models: OLMoE-7B (sparse base), Mixtral-8x7B (sparse instruction-tuned), and Qwen2.5-3B (dense instruction-tuned) on deterministic arithmetic reasoning tasks with objectively verifiable answers. Experiments span four decoding configurations, ranging from greedy decoding to T=1.0. Our evaluation encompasses accuracy, format compliance, output consistency across repeated generations, and confidence metrics, totaling 9,360 model generations. Results demonstrate that the sparse instruction-tuned model exhibits stability comparable to the dense instruction-tuned model across all decoding temperatures, while the sparse base model shows systematic degradation as temperature increases. These findings indicate that instruction tuning, rather than architectural sparsity, is the primary determinant of robustness to decoding randomness on deterministic tasks. We discuss the implications of these results for deploying sparse language models in reliability-critical applications, highlighting scenarios in which sparse architectures can be safely adopted without sacrificing output stability.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.