Consistent LLM Call Handling Across Java Frameworks: A Reference Implementation and Benchmark
Java applications reach large language models (LLMs) through an integration framework, and rely on it to handle a failing provider: to retry what can be retried and nothing else, to wait as long as the provider asks, never to present a truncated answer as complete, and to record each failure in the application's metrics. We state these expectations as a six-clause reliability contract and measure Spring AI 2.0.1 and LangChain4j 1.21.0 against it with a scripted OpenAI-compatible provider: fifteen failure scenarios, synchronous and streaming, three repetitions. LangChain4j meets it in 47 of 77 applicable cases with its defaults and in 51 of 83 when configured explicitly, Spring AI in 72 of...
| Authors | Oleksandr Klymenko |
|---|---|
| Primary category | cs.LG |
| Published | 18 October 2026 |
| Last updated at source | 18 October 2026 |
Popularity, last 4 days
0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.
Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 23 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.