Microscaling floating-point (MXFP) formats have emerged as a promising standard for deploying Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) on modern accelerator architectures. However, existing Post-Training Quantization (PTQ) methods, particularly rotation-based techniques designed for integer formats, suffer from severe performance collapse when applied to MXFP4. Recent studies attribute this failure to a fundamental format mismatch: global orthogonal rotations inadvertently transfer outlier energy across quantization blocks, inducing new outliers that disrupt local block-wise scaling, while often creating bimodal activation distributions that underutilize the limited quantization range. To address these issues, we propose BATQuant (Block-wise Affine Transformation), which restricts transformations to align with MXFP granularity to prevent cross-block outlier propagation, while relaxing orthogonality constraints to optimize distribution shaping. To ensure parameter efficiency, we introduce Global and Private Kronecker (GPK) decomposition to effectively reduces storage and runtime overhead and incorporate Block-wise Learnable Clipping to suppress residual outliers. Extensive experiments on both MLLMs and LLMs demonstrate that BATQuant establishes new state-of-the-art results under aggressive W4A4KV16 configurations, recovering up to 96.43% of full-precision performance on multimodal benchmarks and clearly outperforming existing methods across diverse tasks.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Quantization performance on Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct across various methods. Our method yields superior results compared to baselines across all bit-width settings. The advantage is particularly substantial in the W4A4 setting, where our method clearly outperforms existing methods.
Figure 2: Activation distributions for the down_proj module in layer 35 of Qwen3-8B. The central 3D plots illustrate the activations after transformation. We specifically extract Block 5 (without outliers) and Block 295 (with extreme outliers), and visualize the values after scaling factor division but prior to rounding. (a) After applying the block Hadamard transform, block 295 exhibits a bimodal distribution, leading to inefficient utilization of the bit width. (b) After the block affine transformation, block 295 shows reduced magnitude compared to subplot (a) while effectively leveraging the floating-point quantization grids.
Figure 3: The overall framework of BATQuant. Bottom: Integration of BATQuant into the Transformer architecture. Weight-side transformations are fused offline into the linear layers, while activation-side transformations are applied online. Top: Exemplary view of the Block-wise Affine Transformation , where inputs are partitioned into MXFP-aligned blocks. Each block transformation is decomposed via the Global and Private Kronecker .
Method
Decomposition
MatMul Complexity
# Params of P
Example Count
FlatQuant
Kronecker
O(SN23)
2N
8,192
Ours
w/o
O(SNg)
N⋅g
131,072
Naive Kronecker
O(SN(g1+g2))
k⋅(g12+g22)
10,240
GPK
O(SN(g1+g2))
g12+k⋅g22
2,112
Table 1: Comparison of decomposition methods on parameter counts and computational cost. For the example parameter count, we set the hidden dim N=4096 and the MXFP quantization granularity g=32 . The size of decomposed matrix Ai and Bi are set to g1=8 and g2=4 . The reported MatMul Complexity refers to the computational cost of the activation transformation XP .
Bits
Method
MME
OCRBench
DocVQA
RealWorldQA
VLMBlind
Recovery(%)
BF16
–
2377
906
95.81
70.98
73.98
100.00
W4A8KV16
RTN
2294
883
94.72
69.80
70.99
97.43
QuaRot
2327
870
95.07
69.80
71.12
97.53
SpinQuant
2321
872
94.79
70.46
69.82
97.29
BRQ
2329
865
94.72
70.19
67.18
96.40
FlatQuant
2351
886
95.31
69.02
73.90
98.66
Table 2: Performance comparison of various quantization methods on multimodal benchmarks across different bit-width configurations (e.g., W4A8KV16, W4A4KV16, W4A8KV8 and W4A8KV4).The recovery rate relative to the BF16 baseline is also provided and the best result in each case is marked in bold.
Figure 4: Performance comparison of different methods on Qwen3-8B across LLM benchmarks under various quantization configurations. The results are categorized into Non-Reasoning (left) and Reasoning (right) tasks.
Bits
Method
GSM8K
MATH-500
AIME24
AIME25
GPQA-D
Avg.
Recovery(%)
BF16
–
95.15
96.87
71.46
63.12
58.13
76.95
100.00
W4A8KV16
RTN
93.71
95.53
64.58
55.00
54.39
72.64
93.64
QuaRot
94.47
95.67
64.17
55.63
54.39
72.87
93.91
SpinQuant
94.69
95.53
60.42
51.46
54.58
71.34
91.62
BRQ
93.71
95.80
63.96
53.33
55.40
72.39
93.26
FlatQuant
94.62
95.93
69.17
57.08
54.80
74.32
95.99
Table 3: Performance comparison of various quantization methods on reasoning benchmarks across different bit-width configurations (e.g., W4A8KV16, W4A4KV16, W4A8KV8 and W4A8KV4).The recovery rate relative to the BF16 baseline is also provided and the best result in each case is marked in bold.
Figure 5: Activation distributions of the q_proj module in layer 6 of Qwen3-8B with different quantization methods.
Model
Components
Non-Reasoning Benchmarks
Avg.
Block Trans
Block Clip
ARC-C
ARC-E
HellaSwag
PIQA
Winogrande
Qwen3-8B
✓
53.16
76.36
71.02
74.27
67.72
68.51
✓
52.35
77.44
71.71
76.01
63.69
68.24
✓
✓
53.33
77.53
71.12
75.30
66.22
68.70
Model
Components
Multimodal Benchmarks
Recovery
Block Trans
Block Clip
MME
OCRBench
DocVQA
RealWorldQA
VLMBlind
(%)
Table 4: Ablation study of block-wise affine transformation and block-wise learnable clipping. We conduct the experiments under W4A4KV16 .
Figure 10
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Bits
Method
ARC-C
ARC-E
HellaSwag
PIQA
Winogrande
Avg.
Recovery(%)
BF16
–
56.48
81.06
74.96
77.69
68.03
71.64
100.00
W4A8KV16
RTN
55.72
80.81
73.29
77.09
66.93
70.77
98.75
QuaRot
55.20
78.70
72.77
76.88
65.11
69.73
97.31
SpinQuant
54.69
76.98
72.76
78.07
66.85
69.87
97.52
BRQ
53.67
78.87
73.27
76.66
66.93
69.88
97.43
FlatQuant
55.72
79.63
72.66
76.82
66.22
70.21
98.01
Appendix
Table 5: Performance comparison of various quantization methods on non-reasoning benchmarks across different bit-width configurations (e.g., W4A8KV16, W4A4KV16, W4A8KV8 and W4A8KV4).The recovery rate relative to the BF16 baseline is also provided and the best result in each case is marked in bold.
Bits
Method
Quantizer
Multimodal Benchmark
Recovery
MME
OCRBench
DocVQA
RealWorldQA
VLMBlind
(%)
W4A8KV16
QuaRot
RTN
2201
814
93.11
65.36
63.21
91.43
BRQ
2272
831
93.66
69.80
62.11
93.47
FlatQuant
2311
880
94.65
66.14
67.96
95.64
BATQuant
2312
877
94.58
66.80
69.27
96.11
QuaRot
GPTQ
2327
870
95.07
69.80
71.12
97.53
Appendix
Table 6: Performance comparison of different quantization methods on multimodal benchmarks using RTN and GPTQ as weight quantizers. Bold indicates the best result within each quantizer setting (RTN or GPTQ) for a specific bit configuration.
Bits
Method
Quantizer
Non-Reasoning Benchmark
Avg.
ARC-C
ARC-E
HellaSwag
PIQA
Winogrande
W4A8KV16
QuaRot
RTN
51.37
75.76
70.04
76.61
65.67
67.89
BRQ
47.44
72.87
71.37
75.84
65.19
66.54
FlatQuant
55.63
78.83
72.46
76.22
66.85
70.00
BATQuant
54.33
77.48
72.23
76.61
68.25
69.78
QuaRot
GPTQ
55.20
78.70
72.77
76.88
65.11
69.73
Appendix
Table 7: Performance comparison of different quantization methods on LLM non-reasoning benchmarks using RTN and GPTQ as weight quantizers. Bold indicates the best result within each quantizer setting (RTN or GPTQ) for a specific bit configuration.
Figure 8: Activation distributions within different quantization blocks of the down_proj module in layer 35 of Qwen3-8B with RTN.
Figure 9: Activation distributions within different quantization blocks of the down_proj module in layer 35 of Qwen3-8B with BRQ.
Figure 10: Activation distributions within different quantization blocks of the down_proj module in layer 35 of Qwen3-8B with QuaRot.
Figure 11: Activation distributions within different quantization blocks of the down_proj module in layer 35 of Qwen3-8B with BATQuant (Ours).
Figure 12: Case study of Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct on VLMBlind . The input includes a real image (shown above) and a text question asking to count intersection points. Compared with the BRQ method which fails by hallucinating an intersection (1), BATQuant correctly identifies that there are no intersections (0), matching the BF16 baseline.
Figure 13: Case study of Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct on OCRBench . The input includes a real image of a train and a question asking for the train number. Compared with the BRQ method which fails by only recognizing partial information ("055"), BATQuant correctly identifies the full train number ("055 05995"), matching the BF16 baseline.
The MXFP4 microscaling format, which partitions tensors into blocks of 32 elements sharing an E8M0 scaling factor, has emerged as a promising substrate for efficient LLM inference, backed by native hardware support on NVIDIA Blackwell Tensor Cores. However, activation outliers pose a unique challenge under this format: a single outlier inflates the shared block scale, compressing the effective dynamic range of the remaining elements and causing significant quantization error. Existing rotation-based remedies, including randomized Hadamard and learnable rotations, are data-agnostic and therefore unable to specifically target the channels where outliers concentrate. We propose DuQuant++, which adapts the outlier-aware fine-grained rotation of DuQuant to the MXFP4 format by aligning the rotation block size with the microscaling group size (B{=}32). Because each MXFP4 group possesses an independent scaling factor, the cross-block variance issue that necessitates dual rotations and a zigzag permutation in the original DuQuant becomes irrelevant, enabling DuQuant++ to replace the entire pipeline with a single outlier-aware rotation, which halves the online rotation cost while simultaneously smoothing the weight distribution. Extensive experiments on the LLaMA-3 family under MXFP4 W4A4 quantization show that DuQuant++ consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance. Our code is available at https://github.com/Hsu1023/DuQuant-v2.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) advance toward practical deployment, the Microscaling FP4 (MXFP4) format has emerged as a cornerstone for next-generation low-bit inference, owing to its ability to balance high dynamic range with hardware efficiency. However, directly applying MXFP4 to LLM activation quantization inevitably leads to significant accuracy degradation. In this paper, we theoretically analyze the error structure of MXFP4 activation quantization, revealing that the root cause of this performance drop lies in two structural imbalances between activation distributions and the MXFP4 block floating-point format: (1) extreme inter-block variance imbalance and (2) intra-block codebook utilization imbalance. To address these challenges, we propose TORQ (Two-level Orthogonal Rotation for MXFP4 Quantization), a training-free Post-Training Quantization (PTQ) framework designed to reshape the geometric properties of the activation space through optimal coordinate transformations. At the macroscopic level, TORQ leverages the Schur-Horn theorem to redistribute activation energy via inter-block orthogonal rotation, preventing high-variance blocks from driving up shared scaling factors and thereby preserving the precision of small-magnitude elements. At the microscopic level, TORQ employs maximum-entropy-guided intra-block rotation to alleviate codebook collapse and maximize the MXFP4 codebook's information capacity. Experiments on mainstream LLMs such as LLaMA3 and Qwen3 show that TORQ significantly improves the accuracy of MXFP4 activation quantization compared to existing methods: on Qwen3-32B, the perplexity on WikiText is reduced to 8.43 (vs. 7.61 for BF16), and the average accuracy increases from 38.40% with direct RTN to 73.63% (vs. 74.82% for BF16), substantially narrowing the gap between 4-bit floating-point quantization and full-precision inference.
Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance but are expensive to deploy due to their enormous size. FP4 quantization, with formats such as MXFP4 and NVFP4, offers an appealing solution with native hardware support on modern accelerators. However, maintaining accuracy under FP4 precision remains difficult. A key bottleneck lies in scale optimization: existing methods tightly couple the quantization and dequantization scales, forcing both to conform to the discrete low-precision format required by hardware, such as E8M0 in MXFP4. Yet the quantization scale is never stored and need not obey this constraint, suggesting a significant untapped optimization space. In this work, we propose FOCUS, a post-training quantization framework with end-to-end scale learning for FP4 Optimization via Coupled-Relaxation and Dual-Granularity Scaling. Coupled-Relaxation Scaling (CRS) relaxes the tight coupling between quantization and dequantization scales with a learnable full-precision coefficient, enabling more effective optimization without breaking hardware compliance. Dual-Granularity Scaling (DGS) further refines the quantization scale at a finer sub-block granularity, allowing more precise adaptation to local weight distributions. Experiments across multiple LLM families and benchmarks show that FOCUS achieves state-of-the-art FP4 accuracy under both MXFP4 and NVFP4 formats, while introducing no additional inference overhead. Code and quantized models will be released at https://github.com/tencent/AngelSlim.