Ship a speculative-decoding inference server with EAGLE-3 or P-EAGLE drafts, K8s autoscaling, and a full throughput/latency/cost report. Use when you need help with inference server.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill inference-server --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Inference Server?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-inference-server)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: inference-server
description: Ship a speculative-decoding inference server with EAGLE-3 or P-EAGLE drafts, K8s autoscaling, and a full throughput/latency/cost report. Use when you need help with inference server.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 19
lesson: 14
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [capstone, inference, vllm, sglang, eagle-3, p-eagle, speculative-decoding, quantization, hpa]
---
Given two open target models (Llama 3.3 70B and Qwen3-Coder-30B MoE or GPT-OSS-120B), ship a production serving stack with speculative decoding, quantization, and Kubernetes autoscaling. Publish measured speedups and tail-latency numbers.
Build plan:
1. Deploy target models under vLLM 0.7 (or SGLang 0.4) with FP8 Marlin quantization.
2. Load an aligned EAGLE-3 draft from Red Hat Speculators (or train one via SpecForge).
3. Baseline numbers: tokens/s and p50/p99 latency at batch 1/8/32 without speculation.
4. Enable EAGLE-3. Rerun the same benchmark. Report speedup, acceptance rate, p99 tail-latency delta.
5. Enable P-EAGLE parallel speculation; report the inflection where deeper trees help vs hurt.
6. Run the benchmarks across distributions: ShareGPT, HumanEval, domain data. Publish acceptance-rate drift.
7. Repeat on the second target model (MoE); identify routing-noise sensitivity in draft acceptance.
8. Deploy on Kubernetes with HPA tracking `queue_wait_ms`. Demonstrate scale-out when load triples.
9. Compare $/1M tokens vs Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.7 and OpenAI GPT-5.4 on matched evals.
Assessment rubric:
| Weight | Criterion | Measurement |
|:-:|---|---|
| 25 | Measured speedup vs baseline | 2.5x+ throughput at matched quality on both models |
| 20 | Acceptance rate on realistic traffic | Per-distribution acceptance-rate report |
| 20 | P99 tail-latency discipline | p99 at batch 1/8/32 with and without speculation |
| 20 | Ops | K8s deploy, HPA on queue-wait, smooth rollout, drain-first upgrade |
| 15 | Write-up and methodology | Clear derivation of metrics, matched baselines |
Hard rejects:
- Reporting steady-state throughput without tail latency.
- HPA on CPU instead of queue-wait. Will thrash under GPU saturation.
- Ignoring draft-target version alignment. Drifted drafts cost more than no speculation.
- Cost comparisons that omit the hosted APIs' prompt-caching discounts.
Refusal rules:
- Refuse to serve without a rollout drain. Upgrading in-place while requests are in flight is disqualifying.
- Refuse to report acceptance rate aggregated across distributions. Per-distribution is mandatory.
- Refuse to claim speculative-decoding wins at bs=32 without a matched non-speculative number.
Output: a repo containing the vLLM / SGLang configs, the EAGLE-3 draft download script, K8s deployment manifests, HPA config on queue-wait, the benchmark harness for ShareGPT / HumanEval / domain data, a $/1M tokens comparison table, and a write-up naming the three tail-latency regressions speculative decoding introduced and the mitigation (batch gating, ngram fallback, quantization tweak) that fixed each.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!