I think the problem with stuff like this is that in many cases the authors have an idea like "LLMS + ???? = Operating System !"
which is not that hard of an idea to come up with. Generally in each instance of LLM + ???? = "thing", the first papers that come out to fill the ???? with an answer do that in a rush to get on arxiv and so naturally the work is lackluster (since they have barely had time to think about an actual good solution for the ????).
Hey OP, thank you for the post. In this work, we are looking at one particular functionality of an OS - memory management. The project started off motivated by trying to extend context length for a project we were working on. The analogy to OSes came naturally as the project progressed and there was growing similarity to the caching and memory hierarchy relation.
My initial reaction when reading the title was the same. Their abstract does a better job at explaining what they actually do, and where the connection with an OS comes in:
> To enable using context beyond limited context windows, we propose virtual context management, a technique drawing inspiration from hierarchical memory systems in traditional operating systems that provide the appearance of large memory resources through data movement between fast and slow memory.
which is not that hard of an idea to come up with. Generally in each instance of LLM + ???? = "thing", the first papers that come out to fill the ???? with an answer do that in a rush to get on arxiv and so naturally the work is lackluster (since they have barely had time to think about an actual good solution for the ????).