Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Reasoning LLMs generate very long chains-of-thought, so even small quantization errors add up. With AWQ, Qwen3-4B drops 71.0 → 68.2 on MMLU-Pro (~4% relative loss). 😬 ParoQuant fixes this! It keeps only the critical rotation pairs and fuses everything into a single kernel. Recovers most of the lost reasoning...

171,597 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 35

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Accepted to ICLR 2026 📜 🔗 Blog: 📄 Paper: Great work led by my student @yesheng_liang, in collaboration with @HsChen335, @_SubSir, and @songhan_mit.

Фото профиля FallenOne
FallenOne8 месяцев назад

would love this tested on larger models, like 30B or above, since at that point quantization has a much smaller effect on intelligence

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Testing on larger MoEs is on our roadmap!

Фото профиля NewAIWorld
NewAIWorld8 месяцев назад

We spent years shrinking models just to realize their internal monologues are more expensive than their final answers. Making a tiny model talk to itself for ten thousand tokens is the ultimate engineering paradox.

Фото профиля Sidney Fong
Sidney Fong8 месяцев назад

I'm all for better quantization methods, but it's well known that small models like Qwen3-4B are inherently susceptible to quality loss due to quantization...

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Yes, but those models are really useful for local deployment, so their accuracy is also quite critical!

Фото профиля Milo
Milo8 месяцев назад

Compounding quantization error in long CoT has been the primary blocker for edge reasoning. Fusing critical rotation pairs into a single kernel to salvage 4-bit accuracy is a massive unlock.

Фото профиля manish singh
manish singh8 месяцев назад

Tracks with my experience: long reasoning amplifies tiny quant errors. AWQ helps, but I’d also watch long-context + KV-cache evals, not just MMLU.

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Test our repo out! 😉

Фото профиля Jason
Jason8 месяцев назад

This looks soooo cool to me !

Фото профиля toni
toni8 месяцев назад

The real issue is that most quant benchmarks don't test on long CoT paths - they use short evals. When you run 10k+ token reasoning chains, error drift becomes the actual bottleneck, not compression ratio.

Фото профиля Pit Schultz
Pit Schultz8 месяцев назад

Congrats on the acceptance. this is great for local setups. expecting the FOSS community will engage with native GGUF export or direct llama.cpp support. (override-k-quants have limited accuracy gain).

Фото профиля Andrew
Andrew8 месяцев назад

W4A4 not converging is interesting. The Givens rotation may be at odds with per decoder optimization, and you may be on the cusp of an invariant we’ve yet to formalize

Фото профиля Megan Wang
Megan Wang8 месяцев назад

Congrats! Very impressive results 🎉🎉

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Thanks, Megan!

Фото профиля Solglyph
Solglyph8 месяцев назад

That's really impressive progress on ParoQuant! It sounds like a huge leap forward in efficiency for those LLMs

Фото профиля Shin
Shin8 месяцев назад

very exciting Zhijian!!

Фото профиля LinuxExpert4Hire
LinuxExpert4Hire8 месяцев назад

This is a big step — quantization usually cripples reasoning models, but ParoQuant shows you can keep efficiency and accuracy with the right kernel design.

Фото профиля kfant
kfant8 месяцев назад

the repo is 4months old has it not gained any traction?

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

We've just made it public yesterday.

Фото профиля 지구별여행자🌏🗺️
지구별여행자🌏🗺️7 месяцев назад

It‘s an interesting study! My m1 max will run well with MacBook, right? 😁

Фото профиля Strakyo
Strakyo8 месяцев назад

Hot take quantization quality is becoming product strategy not just infra detail. If ParoQuant holds under long horizon reasoning, it could reset what people expect from small local models.

Фото профиля Anton
Anton8 месяцев назад

Awesome work 😎👍

Фото профиля Lew Bei
Lew Bei8 месяцев назад

Dayum, so cool!

Фото профиля zorazzhole
zorazzhole8 месяцев назад

@zhuoyang_zhang 🫡

Фото профиля Marcell Havlik
Marcell Havlik8 месяцев назад

why doe the ParaQuant looks so much faster than tha AWQ?

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

We found that when quantization is more lossy, the model sometimes generate more tokens.

Фото профиля Marcell Havlik
Marcell Havlik8 месяцев назад

But I mean the speed

Фото профиля Zhijian Liu
Zhijian Liu8 месяцев назад

Token/sec is similar. Just more tokens for this example.

Фото профиля Nick Armstrong
Nick Armstrong8 месяцев назад

Dumb question, but is the comparitor in this image just for presentation or is this a public CLI that is available to test. I’d love to try a few prompts and see how ParoQuant compares to some of my other local models.

Фото профиля Darel Bitsy
Darel Bitsy7 месяцев назад

How’s memory usage for ParoQuant ? Would like to run this on mobile. @grok what’s the memory footprint?

Фото профиля mλdKoding 👾
mλdKoding 👾8 месяцев назад

How can i use paroquant models?

Фото профиля 卡piba拉
卡piba拉8 месяцев назад

good

Фото профиля Max Headroom
Max Headroom8 месяцев назад

How does this method compare in precision and reasoning quality to QTIP used by exllamav3?

Фото профиля ⏏️Boltzmann Brain
⏏️Boltzmann Brain8 месяцев назад

what did you build that UI with?

Похожие видео

Which LLM reasons best when it doesn't have all the information? Enter LLM Poker Arena to find out. It's a Poker Playing benchmark where top reasoning models play Texas Hold'em poker against each other. Claude Opus 4.5, GPT-5.2, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Grok 4 all sit at the same table and play full tournaments to see who finishes with the chips. Poker is very different when it comes to reasoning. It has to balance probabilistic reasoning, opponent modeling and make decisions under uncertainty. Poker is an interesting evaluation because it tests reasoning under incomplete information, something most coding benchmarks do not capture. In this tournaments the rules are: - Each LLM starts with $1,000 chips - Small and big blinds start at $25 / $50 - Blinds double every 3 minutes - All models run in their reasoning or thinking modes After the first 5 tournaments: - Claude Opus 4.5 with Thinking has 3 wins - GPT-5.2 has 2 wins - Grok 4 and Gemini 2.5 Pro have 0 wins Early results suggest Claude performs quite well at poker as well. Also five is a very small sample size. Planning to run many more tournaments, publish the full benchmark data and add a prediction market on top of it. Thanks for the suggestion clipz. Much more coming as part of Poker Cities !! This was built on Replit ⠕ using their AI integrations, which made it straightforward to connect Claude, GPT, and Gemini. What model do you think wins after 100 tournaments?

Anshul Dhawan

32,192 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад