Foundation models, including large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs), are increasingly used for transportation management center (TMC) tasks such as anomaly detection, incident reporting, and traveler information. Deploying multiple such models across TMC functions raises a portfolio question: which model should serve each function, in which deployment mode, and under what shared hardware budget? We formulate this as the Foundation Model Deployment Portfolio (FMDP) problem, a mixed-integer program minimizing total cost of ownership (TCO) subject to per-function quality, latency, and safety constraints over shared GPU capacity. We prove the problem NP-hard by reduction from the 0-1 knapsack problem and propose a polynomial-time greedy heuristic. In an illustrative case study with five TMC functions and 19 candidate (model, mode) pairs, FMDP identifies a mixed portfolio costing $34/mo (97% below the cheapest feasible all-closed-API baseline) by routing four functions to open-source APIs and the one function whose quality floor no open-source model meets to a closed API. Break-even analysis shows that on-premise GPU investment becomes reasonable only above approximately 309 vision queries/hour or if API prices double.
RAG ingestion pipelines frequently augment search corpus index with semantic enrichment indices (e.g., synthetic queries or summaries generated from corpus chunks) that are subsequently queried alongside the base index to improve retrieval via better alignment between document representations and user intent. While these supplementary representations substantially improve retrieval quality, they introduce a computational bottleneck: the configuration space of enrichment types and generator models is combinatorial, and the cost of exhaustive index-time evaluation scales linearly with corpus size. We introduce CAMI (Cost-Aware Multi-Indexing), a framework that formalizes multi-index construction as a budgeted, multi-objective portfolio selection problem. CAMI targets the upstream decision of which enrichment views to generate and materialize before the retrieval backend is applied. CAMI incorporates three primary mechanisms: (i) an agentic discovery phase that proposes corpus-specific representation templates; (ii) an atomic-unit search procedure that evaluates individual enrichment-model pairs and recombines them via fidelity-local closure to identify synergistic portfolios; and (iii) a confidence-aware promotion schedule that prunes unpromising configurations early, decoupling optimization spend from total corpus size. We evaluate CAMI across diverse retrieval corpora. Our findings reveal that the framework systematically isolates high-recall portfolios under strict budget constraints, outperforming standard content-only baselines in challenging settings by up to 9.4% recall@10. Further, CAMI is able to systematically identify these high-recall portfolios using up to 5x less budget compared to random search baselines, making our approach practical in real production scenarios.
Large Language Model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems are increasingly powerful, but current agentic workflow optimization paradigms make an unsatisfying trade-off. Task-level methods spend substantial offline compute yet deploy only a single workflow, leaving complementary candidates unused, while query-level methods synthesize a new workflow per query at substantial inference cost. Our motivating analysis shows these paradigms are more complementary than competing: workflows discovered during offline search often solve different subsets of queries, and many queries handled by expensive query-level generation can already be solved by cheaper precomputed workflows. This suggests a different objective: rather than searching for one universally best workflow or regenerating one per instance, we should build a compact bank of reusable, complementary workflows and select among them adaptively at inference time. Doing so requires solving three coupled problems: generating complementary rather than redundant candidates, compressing them into a small deployable portfolio, and assigning each query to the right workflow under a performance-cost trade-off. To this end, we present FlowBank, a three-stage framework for portfolio-based agentic workflow optimization. Diversifying proposes DiverseFlow to steer search toward under-covered queries and produce a high-coverage candidate pool. Curating proposes CuraFlow to compress this pool into a compact portfolio with minimal redundancy. Matching casts deployment as edge-value prediction on a query-workflow bipartite graph and routes each incoming query to the portfolio member with the best predicted utility. Across five benchmarks, FlowBank achieves the highest average score among the evaluated methods while remaining cost-competitive, improving over the strongest automated and handcrafted baselines by 4.26% and 14.92% relative, respectively.