Traditional scaling focuses heavily on training: larger models, more data and more optimization steps. Inference-time compute shifts part of the budget to the moment when the model is solving a task.
What Counts as Test-Time Compute?
- Generating several candidate answers
- Searching through multiple reasoning paths
- Using a verifier or reward model to rank outputs
- Iterative refinement
- Tool use and external retrieval
One Model, Different Budgets
The same model can behave differently depending on how much computation it receives at inference. A low-cost setting might produce one immediate answer. A higher-cost setting might sample several candidates, inspect intermediate results and select the best response.
| Inference strategy | Compute cost | Potential benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Single pass | Low | Fast response |
| Multiple samples | Medium | Better candidate diversity |
| Search + verifier | High | Stronger task performance |
| Tool-augmented loop | Variable | External information and actions |
The Systems Question
Extra inference compute increases latency and serving cost. It therefore becomes a scheduling and systems problem: which requests deserve more computation, how should candidates be batched, and when is a verifier worth the additional expense?
Experiment Idea
For a small reasoning benchmark, I will compare a single greedy answer, multiple sampled answers with majority voting, and a small search procedure. The objective is not only to measure accuracy but also improvement per unit of added compute.
Metrics
- Accuracy
- Latency
- Total generated tokens
- GPU time
- Improvement per additional candidate