Abstract
Post-training quantization (PTQ) compresses the weights of a trained model with limited compute and data. Down to 4 bits it is near-lossless, but at 2 bits scalar PTQ configurations fall to chance-level accuracy. We study three choices usually treated as implementation details that matter little at 4 bits but decide 2-bit quality: the quantization representation, the calibration data, and the recovery fine-tuning data, across six dense and mixture-of experts models (ranging from $3.8$ to $32$B parameters). Representation is the largest factor and vector codebooks restore usable models where scalar PTQ pipelines collapse. Most of the remaining loss in accuracy is on \emph{generative} tasks, and the amount of performance drop is model-dependent. Furthermore, at a short recovery budget, calibration and recovery data are coupled. The best recovery data depends on the calibration data, so the two must be chosen jointly. The resulting recipe involves a vector codebook representation, a small task-aligned calibration mixture, and an inexpensive codebook-only recovery stage. Including codebooks, it uses about $2.3$ effective bits per weight and retains $89$ to $97\%$ of full-precision question-answering (QA) accuracy where scalar PTQ is at chance, and, including recovery, uses $1.4$ to $30\times$ less compute than the strongest quantization-aware-training (QAT) baseline.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28537
