This work presents EdgeAgent, a cross-layer inference system explicitly co-designed for edge UMA and multi-agent workloads, and demonstrates that the UMA-aware execution alone contributes a 1.29x speedup over batched speculative decoding and adding the agent-aware scheduling lifts the full EdgeAgent system to a 1.77x speedup under extreme tool-use latencies.
Abstract
Emerging multi-agent LLMs demand privacy-preserving edge deployment, yet current inference systems struggle with these collaborative workflows. Specifically, the memory-bound decode phase causes severe bus contention on unified memory architectures (UMA), paralyzing naive CPU-GPU co-execution. Furthermore, speculative decoding in multi-agent workloads faces extreme variance in drafting difficulty, alternating between complex reasoning and predictable structured generation. Compounded by frequent tool-induced stalls, this highly fragmented execution severely underutilizes hardware and defeats traditional static batching. We present EdgeAgent, a cross-layer inference system explicitly co-designed for edge UMA and multi-agent workloads. At the micro-architectural level, it bypasses rigid graph-compiler constraints to enable zero-copy UMA-aware tensor parallelism, utilizing asymmetric memory layouts to fully saturate both CPU and GPU compute units. At the scheduling level, it dynamically allocates draft budgets based on real-time sequence predictability to bound bandwidth waste. Concurrently, an asynchronous suspend-and-yield mechanism actively evicts stalled agents, ensuring continuous hardware saturation during unpredictable tool invocations. Extensive evaluations on an Apple M4 SoC demonstrate that the UMA-aware execution alone contributes a 1.29x speedup over batched speculative decoding. Adding the agent-aware scheduling lifts the full EdgeAgent system to a 1.77x speedup under extreme tool-use latencies.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 8, 2026
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.