Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Unifying Block-wise PTQ and Distillation-based QAT for Progressive Quantization toward 2-bit Instruction-Tuned LLMs

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Instruction-tuned LLMs can reach 2-bit weights without their proprietary data, the paper claims, if the INT2 run starts from an INT4 PTQ checkpoint and imitates the FP16 teacher's token distribution.

desk verdict UPQ is a sensible, well-executed empirical combination of block-wise PTQ and distillation-based QAT that delivers real gains at INT2, though the mechanism story is softer than the headline. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.09104 v1 pith:GBSURCVP submitted 2025-06-10 cs.LG cs.AI

Jung Hyun Lee , Seungjae Shin , Vinnam Kim , Jaeseong You , An Chen This is my paper
classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords 2-bitquantizationinstruction-tunedlargelanguagemodelsquantization-awaretrainingpost-trainingknowledgedistillationgeneralizedJensen-Shannondivergenceinstructionfollowingblock-wisereconstruction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that instruction-tuned large language models can be cut to 2-bit weights—an eight-fold reduction in weight memory—without the proprietary data that made them instruction-tuned in the first place. Its recipe, UPQ, is deliberately two-stage: first a cheap block-wise post-training quantization pass to INT4, then a quantization-aware training pass in which the INT2 student imitates the frozen FP16 teacher's token-level probability distribution through a generalized Jensen-Shannon divergence. The training text is public pre-training data with no instruction-response pairs. On Llama 3.2 1B/3B and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, the INT2 models recover most of their full-precision MMLU and IFEval scores, and the paper reports state-of-the-art results on MMLU and IFEval among 2-bit instruction-tuned quantizations. A reader should care because 2-bit weights are what make large assistants deployable on phones and edge devices, and the result says that democratization does not have to wait for proprietary post-training data to be released.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the two-stage pipeline itself, FP16 $\to$ INT4 $\to$ INT2, composed of two adapted components. The first stage reworks FlexRound's block-wise reconstruction to use a zero-excluding, balanced INT4 integer set $\{-15,-13,\dots,-1,1,\dots,13,15\}$, matching the zero-free Stretched Elastic Quant (SEQ) scheme used at INT2 with levels $\{-3,-1,1,3\}$; the match roughly halves the later INT2 mapping error and lets the learnable scale $\Delta$ carry more of the correction. The second stage is distillation-based QAT whose objective is the generalized Jensen-Shannon divergence $D_{\mathrm{JSD}}(\beta)$ with $\beta=0.5$ between the FP16 teacher's and INT2 student's conditional token distributions, evaluated on ordinary pre-training tokens; this is the component that transfers instruction-following behavior when no instruction-response pairs exist in the data. Section 4.3 argues that starting from the INT4 checkpoint keeps weight updates small and compensatory, which the paper identifies as the reason the tuned model's behavior survives.

What would settle it

The decisive test is to run the identical UPQ pipeline on an open instruction-tuned model family the paper did not test, such as a Qwen or Mistral Instruct model, with the same public DCLM-Edu corpus and 5B-token budget, and check whether IFEval still climbs from the low 20s to the mid-40s; if it does not, the generality claim for open-source instruction-tuned LLMs is refuted. A mechanism-specific variant replaces the instruction-tuned FP16 teacher with the same architecture's base, non-instruction-tuned checkpoint: if the student's IFEval score barely moves, imitating the tuned teacher's distribution is not what carries the effect.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the collapse of instruction-tuned LLMs under INT2 quantization is not primarily a capacity problem; it is a problem of initialization and training signal. With ParetoQ-style next-token-prediction QAT starting from FP16, the 3B model's IFEval score sits at 19.97 and its MMLU at 39.17 after 5B tokens. UPQ instead starts from a block-wise PTQ checkpoint quantized to INT4 with a zero-excluding balanced integer set, which in the paper's illustrative measurement cuts the INT2 quantization error from 0.8984 to 0.5156 and shifts training into 'compensatory' rather than 'reconstruction' dynamics. The second half of the discovery is that the loss must be generalized Jensen-Shannon divergence against the FP16 teacher: distillation alone (without the INT4 start) lifts IFEval to 27.12, the INT4 start alone with next-token prediction leaves it at 20.97, and only the combination reaches 45.19 on the 3B model. The paper claims this is the first demonstration that open-source instruction-tuned LLMs can be quantized to INT2 without proprietary post-training data, using only the public DCLM-Edu corpus.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a 2-bit student model can acquire instruction-following behavior purely by imitating the full-precision teacher's next-token probabilities on ordinary public pre-training text, with no instruction-response pairs anywhere in the training data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • INT2 versions of open instruction-tuned LLMs from 1B to 8B parameters keep usable MMLU and IFEval scores with only public pre-training text, so the proprietary post-training data behind instruction tuning is not a barrier to 2-bit deployment.
  • Both halves of the pipeline are necessary: dropping the INT4 PTQ start drops IFEval from 45.19 to 27.12 on the 3B model, and keeping the INT4 start but replacing JSD distillation with next-token prediction leaves IFEval at 20.97, so neither component alone tells the story.
  • At the same INT4 initialization, adding an NTP term to the JSD loss degrades MMLU from 53.20 to 50.76 and IFEval from 45.19 to 21.69, so next-token prediction on pre-training text actively pushes the student away from instruction-following behavior.
  • Because the INT4 stage requires only one to two million calibration tokens and a few GPU-hours, the pipeline is far cheaper than an INT4 QAT initialization, which the paper estimates at one to two days on an 8-GPU node.
  • If the results hold, the earlier finding that large 2-bit models are Pareto-optimal over smaller 4-bit models now extends to instruction-tuned deployments, which is the motivation the paper states in its introduction.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The JSD+NTP collapse suggests the public pre-training corpus actively encodes non-instruction-following behavior; a testable extension is filtering or re-weighting the distillation corpus toward instruction-like passages to see whether IFEval gains can be pushed beyond the reported numbers.
  • The cleanest untested control is the teacher swap: if a base, non-instruction-tuned teacher transfers just as well, the paper's mechanism story would need revision and the benefit might come from the smoothed JSD objective itself rather than from imitating the tuned teacher.
  • The paper's limitations section notes that only weight quantization is studied and that the largest model tested is 8B; activation quantization and 100B+ scale are the tests that would determine whether the deployment promise is realized in practice.
  • The 'no proprietary data' claim governs the quantization pipeline's training data; the FP16 teacher is itself the product of proprietary post-training, so an end-to-end open pipeline would also need an openly tuned teacher, and the paper does not test how much of the transfer depends on teacher provenance.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes UPQ, a two-stage progressive quantization framework for instruction-tuned LLMs: first an FP16 model is quantized to INT4 via block-wise PTQ (modified FlexRound), then it is further quantized to INT2 via distillation-based QAT that minimizes a generalized Jensen-Shannon divergence between the INT2 student and the original FP16 teacher on public pre-training text (DCLM-Edu). The central claim is that this is the first successful INT2 quantization of open-source instruction-tuned LLMs without proprietary post-training data, achieving state-of-the-art MMLU and IFEval scores. Results are reported for Llama 3.2 1B/3B Instruct and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, with ablations over INT4 PTQ methods and distillation losses (Tables 2 and 3) and a parameter-dynamics analysis in Section 4.3.

Significance. If validated, UPQ would be a practically useful result: it suggests that 2-bit weight-only quantization of instruction-tuned LLMs is feasible using only public data, which matters for edge deployment and for democratizing access to instruction-tuned models. The paper has clear strengths: the method formulation is explicit, the ablations isolate the contributions of the INT4 initialization and the distillation loss, and the main results are consistent at the 3B and 8B scales. The authors also provide a qualitative analysis of instruction-following failures and a study of weight/scale dynamics during QAT. However, confidence in the headline claim is limited by the lack of error bars, the selection of the distillation loss on the same benchmarks used for final reporting, and the absence of a base-teacher ablation that would verify the proposed mechanism of instruction-following transfer.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table 4, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct row] The UPQ IFEval score (28.56) is only 0.72 points above Distill-QAT (27.84), which is within typical evaluation noise for IFEval, and the paper reports no error bars or repeated runs anywhere. This single-row result undercuts the claim of consistent instruction-following recovery across model sizes; please provide multiple seeds with variance or a statistical test, or soften the cross-size claim.
  2. [Section 3.3, Eq. (5)] The proposed mechanism is that the INT2 student acquires instruction-following by imitating the token-level distribution of the FP16 instruction-tuned teacher on DCLM-Edu, but no ablation replaces that teacher with a pre-trained base model. Add a Distill-QAT run using a non-instruction-tuned teacher (e.g., Llama 3.2 3B Base) and report IFEval and MMLU; if the base teacher performs similarly, the effect is generic distillation rather than instruction-tuning transfer, and the 'without proprietary data' mechanism needs reframing.
  3. [Section 4.1, Table 3] The generalized JSD loss is selected because it scores highest on MMLU and IFEval, which are the same benchmarks used to substantiate the state-of-the-art claim in the abstract and in Section 4.2. This is test-set-based model selection; please report results on a held-out set or additional benchmarks not used for choosing the loss, or explicitly disclose and justify the selection procedure.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 2, OmniQuant rows] The OmniQuant variant reports catastrophic WikiText2 perplexities (412.52 for INT4 PTQ and 211.51 for INT4 PTQ to Distill-QAT) with no investigation; this anomaly should be explained or at least acknowledged, as it may indicate an implementation or stability issue.
  2. [Eq. (5)] The notation X[:n] is defined as {x1, ..., x_{n-1}}, which is inconsistent with standard Python-style slicing (X[:n] would include x_n); please correct the indexing to avoid confusion.
  3. [Appendix A title] The appendix title contains a typo, 'Qantization-Aware Training', and the conclusion contains grammar issues such as 'LLMS remains unrepaired'; a proofreading pass is needed.
  4. [Appendix H] The limitations section does not mention the method's dependence on teacher instruction-tuning or the benchmark-driven choice of the distillation loss; these are important caveats and should be listed alongside the existing limitations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims rest on external benchmark evaluations and a teacher-student distillation objective, not on inputs that equal the outputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a two-stage empirical pipeline. Stage 1 (INT4 block-wise PTQ) minimizes block-wise output MSE, an external reconstruction objective. Stage 2 (Eq. 5) minimizes generalized JSD between the INT2 student and the FP16 teacher on public pre-training tokens. IFEval and MMLU are held-out benchmarks; neither appears in Eq. 5 or in the PTQ objective, so the reported scores are genuine evaluations rather than quantities forced by the loss. The choice of generalized JSD over alternative distillation losses, and the choice of FlexRound over OmniQuant, are made by comparing benchmark scores in Section 4.1; this is model selection, not a fitted-parameter-then-prediction reduction, and it does not make the final benchmark numbers equal to the selection criterion by construction. The paper cites its own earlier FlexRound work and follows Liu et al. (ParetoQ) for the SEQ INT2 scheme, but these are adopted components used as baselines, and the central 'without proprietary data' claim does not reduce to those citations. Appendix H's limitations concern model scale, activation quantization, and specialized tasks, not an undisclosed circular dependence. Overall, no equation in the paper is equivalent to its input by definition, and no fitted value is renamed as a prediction; the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces no new latent entities. It relies on standard QAT machinery (STE, learnable quantization scales, distillation) plus a somewhat strong behavioral-transfer assumption.

free parameters (4)
  • Delta_INT4 (FlexRound quantizer scale) = learned on 1-2M C4 tokens
    Per-channel scale in Eq. 2 that controls INT4 rounding; optimized by block-wise reconstruction. The method depends on this fitting for the INT4 PTQ initialization.
  • S and s (FlexRound element-wise rounding factors) = learned during block-wise PTQ
    Learnable element-wise division factors in Eq. 2 that determine the INT4 weight rounding; central to the INT4 initialization.
  • Delta_INT4_to_INT2 (INT2 quantizer scale) = initialized to max(|W_INT4|), then trained in Distill-QAT
    Per-channel scale in Eq. 4 that maps INT4 weights to the four INT2 levels; its training is part of the Distill-QAT objective.
  • Beta (JSD interpolation coefficient) = 0.5
    Set by hand in Eq. 5 to balance forward and reverse KL; ablated only implicitly via Generalized JSD vs other losses, no sensitivity analysis.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Straight-Through Estimator approximates the derivative of rounding (floor) as 1 in backpropagation.
    Used throughout QAT, derived in Appendix G. Without STE, no gradient flows through the quantizer.
  • domain assumption LLM weights are bell-shaped and centered near zero, so a zero-excluding balanced 4-level scheme is suitable for INT2.
    Section 3.1, citing Dettmers 2023 and Huang 2024. This justifies the SEQ scheme inherited from ParetoQ.
  • domain assumption Generalized JSD on pre-training text transfers instruction-following behavior from teacher to student.
    Core hypothesis in Section 3.3. The paper provides empirical support but no mechanism beyond the loss definition.
  • domain assumption The FP16 teacher remains frozen and its outputs are treated as ground-truth distributions.
    Implicit in Eq. 5; the method has no separate validation that teacher distributions are well-calibrated on pre-training text.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unifying Block-wise PTQ and Distillation-based QAT for Progressive Quantization toward 2-bit Instruction-Tuned LLMs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GBSURCVP

@misc{pith2026250609104,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unifying Block-wise PTQ and Distillation-based QAT for Progressive Quantization toward 2-bit Instruction-Tuned LLMs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GBSURCVP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.09104}
}
abstract

As the rapid scaling of large language models (LLMs) poses significant challenges for deployment on resource-constrained devices, there is growing interest in extremely low-bit quantization, such as 2-bit. Although prior works have shown that 2-bit large models are pareto-optimal over their 4-bit smaller counterparts in both accuracy and latency, these advancements have been limited to pre-trained LLMs and have not yet been extended to instruction-tuned models. To bridge this gap, we propose Unified Progressive Quantization (UPQ)$-$a novel progressive quantization framework (FP16$\rightarrow$INT4$\rightarrow$INT2) that unifies block-wise post-training quantization (PTQ) with distillation-based quantization-aware training (Distill-QAT) for INT2 instruction-tuned LLM quantization. UPQ first quantizes FP16 instruction-tuned models to INT4 using block-wise PTQ to significantly reduce the quantization error introduced by subsequent INT2 quantization. Next, UPQ applies Distill-QAT to enable INT2 instruction-tuned LLMs to generate responses consistent with their original FP16 counterparts by minimizing the generalized Jensen-Shannon divergence (JSD) between the two. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to demonstrate that UPQ can quantize open-source instruction-tuned LLMs to INT2 without relying on proprietary post-training data, while achieving state-of-the-art performances on MMLU and IFEval$-$two of the most representative benchmarks for evaluating instruction-tuned LLMs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.09104 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Change in MMLU (left) and IFEval (center) scores during training (up to 5B tokens) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Weights distribution within the first channel of the first down-projection layer in Llama 3.2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Change in MMLU (left) and IFEval (right) scores during training (up to 30B tokens) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalized L1 distance dynamics of learnable parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Weights distribution within the first channel of the first down-projection layer in Llama 3.2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Normalized L1 distance dynamics of learnable parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Efficient Reasoning on the Edge

    cs.LG 2026-03 accept novelty 5.5 of 10

    LoRA adapters, budget-forced GRPO, dynamic switching, parallel verification and FPTQuant enable practical chain-of-thought reasoning on quantized Qwen2.5-7B for edge devices.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Paretoq: Scaling laws in extremely low-bit llm quantization, 2025a

    Zechun Liu, Changsheng Zhao, Hanxian Huang, Sijia Chen, Jing Zhang, Jiawei Zhao, Scott Roy, Lisa Jin, Yunyang Xiong, Yangyang Shi, Lin Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Bilge Soran, Raghuraman Krishnamoorthi, Tijmen Blankevoort, and Vikas Chandra. Paretoq: Scaling laws in extremely low-bit llm quantization, 2025a. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.02631. Dan Hendrycks, C...

    arXiv

  2. [3]

    Wenqi Shao, Mengzhao Chen, Zhaoyang Zhang, Peng Xu, Lirui Zhao, Zhiqian Li, Kaipeng Zhang, Peng Gao, Yu Qiao, and Ping Luo

    URL https: //proceedings.mlr.press/v202/lee23h.html. Wenqi Shao, Mengzhao Chen, Zhaoyang Zhang, Peng Xu, Lirui Zhao, Zhiqian Li, Kaipeng Zhang, Peng Gao, Yu Qiao, and Ping Luo. Omniquant: Omnidirectionally calibrated quantization for large language models. InThe Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024a. URL https: //openreview.n...

    arXiv

  3. [5]

    Jianping Gou, Baosheng Yu, Stephen J Maybank, and Dacheng Tao

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17888. Jianping Gou, Baosheng Yu, Stephen J Maybank, and Dacheng Tao. Knowledge distillation: A survey.Interna- tional Journal of Computer Vision, 129(6):1789–1819,

    arXiv

  4. [7]

    Alexander Lin, Jeremy Wohlwend, Howard Chen, and Tao Lei

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03898. Alexander Lin, Jeremy Wohlwend, Howard Chen, and Tao Lei. Autoregressive knowledge distillation through imitation learning. In Bonnie Webber, Trevor Cohn, Yulan He, and Yang Liu, editors,Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 6121–6133, Online, November

    arXiv 2020

  5. [9]

    Bitdistiller: Unleashing the potential of sub-4-bit llms via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.10631,

    Dayou Du, Yijia Zhang, Shijie Cao, Jiaqi Guo, Ting Cao, Xiaowen Chu, and Ningyi Xu. Bitdistiller: Unleashing the potential of sub-4-bit llms via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.10631,

    arXiv

  6. [10]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2309.05516. Aaron Grattafiori, Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Alex Vaughan, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, Anirudh Goyal, Anthony Hartshorn, Aobo Yang, Archi Mitra, Archie Sravankumar, Artem Korenev, Arthur Hinsvark, Arun Rao, Aston Zhang, Aure...

    arXiv

  7. [11]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2407.21783. Loubna Ben Allal, Anton Lozhkov, Elie Bakouch, Gabriel Martín Blázquez, Guilherme Penedo, Lewis Tunstall, Andrés Marafioti, Hynek Kydlí ˇcek, Agustín Piqueres Lajarín, Vaibhav Srivastav, Joshua Lochner, Caleb Fahlgren, Xuan-Son Nguyen, Clémentine Fourrier, Ben Burtenshaw, Hugo Larcher, Haojun Zhao, Cyril Zakka, Mathieu...

    arXiv

  8. [13]

    Anton Lozhkov, Loubna Ben Allal, Leandro von Werra, and Thomas Wolf

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11794. Anton Lozhkov, Loubna Ben Allal, Leandro von Werra, and Thomas Wolf. Fineweb-edu: the finest collection of educational content,

    arXiv

Show all 20 references
  1. [16]

    Elias Frantar, Saleh Ashkboos, Torsten Hoefler, and Dan Alistarh

    URL https://zenodo.org/records/12608602. Elias Frantar, Saleh Ashkboos, Torsten Hoefler, and Dan Alistarh. GPTQ: Accurate post-training quantization for generative pre-trained transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.17323,

  2. [17]

    A practical mixed precision algorithm for post-training quantization.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.05397,

    Nilesh Prasad Pandey, Markus Nagel, Mart van Baalen, Yin Huang, Chirag Patel, and Tijmen Blankevoort. A practical mixed precision algorithm for post-training quantization.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.05397,

    arXiv

  3. [18]

    AWQ: Activation-aware weight quantization for llm compression and acceleration.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.00978,

    Ji Lin, Jiaming Tang, Haotian Tang, Shang Yang, Xingyu Dang, and Song Han. AWQ: Activation-aware weight quantization for llm compression and acceleration.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.00978,

    arXiv

  4. [19]

    SpQR: A sparse-quantized representation for near-lossless llm weight compression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03078, 2023b

    Tim Dettmers, Ruslan Svirschevski, Vage Egiazarian, Denis Kuznedelev, Elias Frantar, Saleh Ashkboos, Alexan- der Borzunov, Torsten Hoefler, and Dan Alistarh. SpQR: A sparse-quantized representation for near-lossless llm weight compression.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03078, 2023b...

    arXiv

  5. [20]

    18 F Review on Further Quantization Methods In this section, we briefly summarize notable quantization methods, which are not referred in Section 2.AdaRound[Nagel et al., 2020] suggests an adaptive rounding method for PTQ, which optimizes weight quantizer by deciding whether e...

    2020

  6. [2016]

    Think you have solved question answering? try arc, the ai2 reasoning challenge.arXiv:1803.05457v1,

    Peter Clark, Isaac Cowhey, Oren Etzioni, Tushar Khot, Ashish Sabharwal, Carissa Schoenick, and Oyvind Tafjord. Think you have solved question answering? try arc, the ai2 reasoning challenge.arXiv:1803.05457v1,

    arXiv

  7. [2019]

    Winogrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.10641,

    Keisuke Sakaguchi, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, and Yejin Choi. Winogrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.10641,

    1907 arXiv

  8. [2020]

    doi: 10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.494

    Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.494. URL https://aclanthology.org/2020.emnlp-main.494/. Minsoo Kim, Sihwa Lee, Janghwan Lee, Sukjin Hong, Du-Seong Chang, Wonyong Sung, and Jungwook Choi. Token-scaled logit distillation for ternary we...

    2020 doi

  9. [2022]

    Sharpness-aware quantization for deep neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.12273,

    Jing Liu, Jianfei Cai, and Bohan Zhuang. Sharpness-aware quantization for deep neural networks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.12273,

    arXiv

  10. [2023]

    Erik Johannes Husom, Arda Goknil, Merve Astekin, Lwin Khin Shar, Andre Kåsen, Sagar Sen, Benedikt Andreas Mithassel, and Ahmet Soylu

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/1910.10683. Erik Johannes Husom, Arda Goknil, Merve Astekin, Lwin Khin Shar, Andre Kåsen, Sagar Sen, Benedikt Andreas Mithassel, and Ahmet Soylu. Sustainable llm inference for edge ai: Evaluating quantized llms for energy efficiency, output accuracy, a...

    1910 arXiv

  11. [2024]

    10 Jongwoo Ko, Sungnyun Kim, Tianyi Chen, and Se-Young Yun

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.13649. 10 Jongwoo Ko, Sungnyun Kim, Tianyi Chen, and Se-Young Yun. Distillm: Towards streamlined distillation for large language models,

    arXiv

  12. [2025]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2502.02737. Jeffrey Li, Alex Fang, Georgios Smyrnis, Maor Ivgi, Matt Jordan, Samir Gadre, Hritik Bansal, Etash Guha, Sedrick Keh, Kushal Arora, Saurabh Garg, Rui Xin, Niklas Muennighoff, Reinhard Heckel, Jean Mercat, Mayee Chen, Suchin Gururangan, Mitc...

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.