Paper detail

Towards Principled Design of Mixture-of-Experts Language Models under Memory and Inference Constraints

Modern Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models are designed based on total parameters (memory footprint) and active parameters (inference cost). However, we find these two factors alone are insufficient to describe an optimal architecture. Through a systematic study, we demonstrate that MoE performance is primarily determined by total parameters ($N_{total}$) and expert sparsity ($s:=n_{exp}/n_{topk}$). Moreover, $n_{exp}$ and $n_{topk}$ do not "cancel out" within the sparsity ratio; instead, a larger total number of experts slightly penalizes performance by forcing a reduction in core model dimensions (depth and width) to meet memory constraints. This motivates a simple principle for MoE design which maximizes $N_{total}$ while minimizing $s$ (maximizing $n_{topk}$) and $n_{exp}$ under the given constraints. Our findings provide a robust framework for resolving architectural ambiguity and guiding MoE design.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 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.