Configuration
Table | |
|---|
| bit-width | 4 |
| granularity | group-128 (--w_group_size 128) |
| scheme | asymmetric, weight-only (activations stay bf16) |
| CBQ settings | group-tuned (see below) |
| CBD window / overlap | 2 / 1 |
| epochs per window | 3 |
| LoRA-Rounding rank | 5 |
| CFP weight truncation | off |
Delta_W hard-round fraction | 1.0 |
| held-out perplexity | 2.1147 (bf16 baseline 2.0084, delta +0.1063) |
| mean per-token KL(FP || quant) | 0.05527 over 63406 tokens |
Calibration: 4096 rows of
open-r1/OpenR1-Math-220k
rendered with the Qwen3 chat template and truncated to
2048 tokens. This is not the paper's calibration set
(the paper uses 128 samples); it is matched to a sibling QAT framework so the two are
comparable.
Perplexity above is on held-out rows of the same distribution and is a sanity metric
only — it is not a reasoning-benchmark score.
Provenance and caveats
Produced by an unofficial CBQ implementation written from the paper text; CBQ has
no official code release. The paper is ambiguous or self-inconsistent in several
places (notably the interaction of Eq. 8 and Eq. 11 for Delta_W initialisation, and
the direction of the Algorithm 1 objective), and every such choice is documented with
the measurement behind it. Two settings differ from the paper deliberately:
group-wise rather than per-channel quantization where noted, and the calibration set
above.
This checkpoint uses --cfp_weight off and
--hard_round_frac 1.0 rather than the paper's values. Both paper settings were
measured worse at group-128: CFP weight truncation costs ~+2.6 perplexity because
at group-128 an outlier only inflates its own 128-wide group, and rounding
Delta_W only in the late phase leaves most of the optimization on a near-lossless
(degenerate) objective.
Not affiliated with the CBQ authors or with Qwen. Inherits the base model's license.