Language models (LMs) are increasingly used in recommender systems to generate recommendations or coordinate recommendation tools. However, does their strong performance imply that serving-time LM inference is necessary? We challenge this seemingly reasonable but unverified assumption. To investigate this question, we introduce recovery-based mechanism auditing, which tests whether independent alternatives can achieve the accuracy of LM-based recommender systems without the audited inference mechanisms under controlled information and evaluation conditions. For generative recommendation, we propose LIME-Rec, which combines sequential, collaborative, and offline semantic information without autoregressive LM decoding. On three Amazon Reviews datasets (Beauty, Toys, and Sports), LIME-Rec achieves the highest reported mean in all 12 dataset-metric combinations, with up to a 15.2% relative improvement in Recall@10 over GRAM, an LM-based generative recommender. For agentic recommendation, we propose DART-Rec, which replaces LM-based tool control with deterministic fusion and fixed expert selection. On 1,000 Beauty users, given the same candidate items and expert scores, deterministic fusion achieves a 16.7% relative improvement in Recall@10 over a fine-tuned LM controller. With at most two tool calls, fixed expert selection matches the LM controllers' Hit@10 outcomes for every user in 17 of 18 comparisons. These findings demonstrate that strong recommendation performance does not necessarily require serving-time LM inference: under the evaluated task and information conditions, alternatives without the specified inference mechanisms can match or exceed the accuracy of their LM-based counterparts. To support reproducibility, code is available at https://github.com/Double-wk/LIME-Rec.

翻译：暂无翻译