Investigating the Impact of Quantization Methods on the Safety and Reliability of Large Language Models
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:YJH3PLLArecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful tools for modern applications, but their computational demands limit accessibility. Quantization offers efficiency gains, yet its impact on safety and trustworthiness remains poorly understood. To address this, we introduce OpenMiniSafety, a human-curated safety dataset with 1.067 challenging questions to rigorously evaluate model behavior. We publicly release human safety evaluations for four LLMs (both quantized and full-precision), totaling 4.268 annotated question-answer pairs. By assessing 66 quantized variants of these models using four post-training quantization (PTQ) and two quantization-aware training (QAT) methods across four safety benchmarks including human-centric evaluations we uncover critical safety performance trade-offs. Our results show both PTQ and QAT can degrade safety alignment, with QAT techniques like QLORA or STE performing less safely. No single method consistently outperforms others across benchmarks, precision settings, or models, highlighting the need for safety-aware compression strategies. Furthermore, precision-specialized methods (e.g., QUIK and AWQ for 4-bit, AQLM and Q-PET for 2-bit) excel at their target precision, meaning that these methods are not better at compressing but rather different approaches.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
FLIPS: Instance-Fingerprinting for LLMs via Pseudo-random Sequences
FLIPS identifies LLM instances with 96% closed-set and 90% open-set accuracy by exploiting biases in generated binary random sequences across 237 instances.
-
The Defense Trilemma: Why Prompt Injection Defense Wrappers Fail?
No continuous utility-preserving input wrapper can eliminate all prompt injection risks in connected prompt spaces for language models.
-
Quality Is Not a Safety Proxy Under Quantization
Across 51 quantized checkpoints, quality metrics fail to predict safety drops in 36 pairings and 10 hidden-danger cases, while a new RTSI screen routes all 10 dangerous rows to testing at matched bucket size.
-
Quantization Undoes Alignment: Bias Emergence in Compressed LLMs Across Models and Precision Levels
3-bit quantization induces new stereotypical biases in 6-21% of previously unbiased BBQ items across three LLMs, undetected by perplexity increases under 3%, with models declining in 'unknown' responses by 17.4%.
-
Are Large Language Models Economically Viable for Industry Deployment?
Small LLMs under 2B parameters achieve better economic break-even, energy efficiency, and hardware density than larger models on legacy GPUs for industrial tasks.
-
Weight Pruning Amplifies Bias: A Multi-Method Study of Compressed LLMs for Edge AI
Activation-aware pruning preserves perplexity but amplifies bias in LLMs, with 47-59% of previously neutral items developing new stereotypical responses at 70% sparsity.
-
From 2:4 to 8:16 sparsity patterns in LLMs for Outliers and Weights with Variance Correction
8:16 sparsity with variance correction and outlier handling lets compressed LLMs match or exceed dense-model accuracy under fixed memory limits, outperforming the common 2:4 pattern in flexibility.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.