Quantization correction methods usually optimize weights, quantization parameters, or reconstruction objectives, while the underlying parameter subspaces responsible for effective correction remain unclear. In this work, we study quantization correction from a parameter subspace perspective and reveal that correction capability is highly non-uniform across parameter groups. By decomposing trainable parameters into backbone weights, normalization-affine parameters, and quantization parameters, we show that the low-dimensional normalization-affine subspace provides a highly efficient correction direction under matched budgets. Based on this finding, we propose SandwichQuant, a two-stage normalization-affine correction framework that performs adaptation before and after quantization. The pre-stage improves quantization robustness, while the post-stage compensates residual errors after the quantized graph is fixed. Extensive experiments on vision models and large language models demonstrate consistent improvements under various low-bit quantization settings, validating the effectiveness of subspace-aligned correction.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: A low-dimensional affine subspace provides high-leverage correction directions before and after full-space optimization. The post-QAT result diagnoses useful residual directions under a fixed protocol; it does not imply greater asymptotic capacity than full-space training.
Figure 2: Matched-budget parameter-subspace comparison on Qwen3-8B under W2A4KV4. All trainable alternatives use exactly the same number of scalar parameters as the normalization-affine subspace Φ and share identical calibration data, optimization steps, and training objectives. (a) Relative WikiText-2 perplexity, C4 perplexity, and Avg6 accuracy, normalized to the frozen quantized baseline (higher is better). (b) Accuracy–perplexity trade-off, where the horizontal axis reports the mean relative reduction in WikiText-2 and C4 perplexity against the frozen baseline. Despite its extremely low dimensionality, Φ achieves the strongest overall recovery and slightly outperforms the gradient-selected TopGradW subspace.
Figure 3: The post-PTQ affine component reshapes the functional geometry of quantization error across two regimes. Each subfigure reports the four-state intervention, task-aware recovery metrics, and structured-source analysis for Llama3-8B and Qwen3-8B. These one-sided probes isolate SandwichQuant-Post , the residual-correction component of SandwichQuant . Across weight-only W3A16 and joint W2A4KV4, it reduces task-relevant degradation more consistently than isolated local operator error, indicating that its principal effect emerges through propagation and interaction rather than uniform local reconstruction.
Model
Method
W/A
Val. Acc. (%)
Drop (%)
Full precision
32/32
71.30
–
PACT
4/4
64.06
-7.24
DSQ
4/4
67.36
-3.94
LSQ
4/4
69.01
-2.29
LSQ+
4/4
68.21
-3.09
SandwichQuant-Post + LSQ+
4/4
69.83
-1.47
Table 1: One-sided post-QAT affine adaptation on CIFAR-100 with MobileNetV2. Highlighted rows apply only SandwichQuant-Post after the named QAT checkpoint; they are component controls rather than the complete two-stage SandwichQuant pipeline. Drop denotes the signed accuracy difference from the 71.30% FP32 baseline.
Table 5
Llama3-8B
Qwen3-8B
Order
W3A16
W2A4KV4
W3A16
W2A4KV4
Wiki2 ↓
C4 ↓
Avg6 ↑
Wiki2 ↓
C4 ↓
Avg6 ↑
Wiki2 ↓
C4 ↓
Avg6 ↑
Wiki2 ↓
C4 ↓
Avg6 ↑
PTQ
8.33
13.10
68.83
18.07
50.56
46.81
11.29
17.09
71.87
18.71
38.27
49.62
PTQ→Φpost
7.89
12.21
70.08
12.83
30.35
52.49
10.60
16.38
72.17
12.73
26.80
56.47
Φpre→PTQ
8.28
12.87
68.89
13.93
37.96
48.72
10.74
16.42
72.31
12.99
27.99
55.28
SandwichQuant
7.87
12.13
70.05
12.31
28.86
53.44
10.51
16.15
72.34
12.03
25.37
58.05
Table 4: Order ablation of normalization-affine adaptation. Φpre preconditions PTQ, whereas Φpost corrects the frozen quantized graph. Wiki2/C4 are perplexities ( ↓ ) and Avg6 is mean zero-shot accuracy ( ↑ ). Each affine stage uses the same per-stage budget; SandwichQuant contains two affine stages and rebuilds the PTQ graph from the original dense checkpoint between them.
Model
Method
Perplexity ↓
Zero-shot Accuracy (%) ↑
Avg. ↑
Wiki2
C4
PIQA
ARC-E
ARC-C
HS
WG
BoolQ
FP16
5.47
7.27
78.9
74.6
46.1
75.9
69.2
77.7
70.4
RTN
8.22
11.53
76.3
66.5
40.6
68.7
65.8
67.5
64.2
SandwichQuant (RTN)
7.40
10.29
77.4
68.9
41.9
71.0
66.2
70.9
66.1
AWQ
6.79
8.93
77.1
69.9
41.8
71.2
67.7
71.5
66.3
SandwichQuant (AWQ)
6.47
8.55
77.5
70.8
43.1
72.4
67.3
72.9
67.3
Table 5: Weight-only W3A16 results (group size 128). Highlighted rows apply the complete SandwichQuant pipeline to the backend named in parentheses. Avg. is the unweighted mean over the six zero-shot tasks. ResComp∗ uses GPTAQ as its base quantizer. All variants use the same 128 C4 sequences (length 2,048; seed 0); full settings are in Appendix A .
Model
Method
Perplexity ↓
Zero-shot Accuracy (%) ↑
Avg. ↑
Wiki2
C4
PIQA
ARC-E
ARC-C
HS
WG
BoolQ
FP16
5.47
7.27
78.9
74.6
46.1
75.9
69.2
77.7
70.4
QuaRot + GPTAQ
11.7
24.8
62.3
45.6
25.6
41.2
54.0
62.4
48.5
SandwichQuant (QuaRot+GPTAQ)
8.2
14.0
66.8
50.0
31.6
54.9
58.2
64.5
54.3
QuaRot + ResComp∗
11.5
23.6
63.6
46.4
24.9
40.8
56.0
61.9
48.9
Llama2-7B
SandwichQuant (QuaRot+ ResComp∗ )
8.1
14.2
68.1
52.2
30.7
54.8
59.1
65.8
55.1
Table 6: Joint W2A4KV4 results (group size 128). Highlighted rows apply the complete SandwichQuant pipeline to the indicated QuaRot backend. Avg. is the unweighted mean over six zero-shot tasks. ResComp∗ uses GPTAQ as its base quantizer. All variants use the same 128 WikiText-2 sequences (length 2,048; seed 0); full settings are in Appendix A .
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model
Quantization setting
Device
∣Φ∣
Wall-clock time (min)
Total
Peak mem. (GiB)
Probe PTQ
Φpre
Deploy PTQ
Φpost
(min)
Llama3-8B
GPTQ W3A16, g128
C600-A
266,240
67.2
1.3
67.2
1.3
137.0
16.1
Llama3-8B
QuaRot+ResComp W2A4KV4, g128
C600-A
266,240
89.0
1.4
89.0
1.4
180.8
25.0
Qwen3-8B
GPTQ W3A16, g128
C500
299,008
55.0
1.6
55.0
1.6
113.2
17.0
Qwen3-8B
QuaRot+ResComp W2A4KV4, g128
C500
299,008
85.0
1.6
85.0
1.6
173.2
25.0
Appendix
Table 7: Representative offline construction cost of SandwichQuant . Wall-clock time is decomposed into the disposable PTQ probe, pre-PTQ affine adaptation, the deployable PTQ rebuild, and post-PTQ affine adaptation. Times are reconstructed from representative single-accelerator C500/C600-A runs and include graph construction and checkpoint I/O but exclude downstream evaluation. The two affine stages update only ∣Φ∣ native normalization parameters. The final graph introduces no additional parameters or inference operators relative to its base PTQ graph.
Table 10
Model
Method
Perplexity ↓
Zero-shot Accuracy (%) ↑
Avg. ↑
Wiki2
C4
PIQA
ARC-E
ARC-C
HS
WG
BoolQ
FP16
5.47
7.27
78.9
74.6
46.1
75.9
69.2
77.7
70.4
SpinQuant + GPTAQ
11.6
26.5
62.2
42.3
25.5
40.9
54.7
63.4
48.1
SandwichQuant (SpinQuant+GPTAQ)
8.6
15.2
65.6
52.2
30.1
53.5
57.6
63.1
53.7
SpinQuant + ResComp∗
11.1
24.7
62.7
45.4
27.6
42.3
55.0
62.3
49.2
Llama2-7B
SandwichQuant (SpinQuant+ ResComp∗ )
8.5
15.3
67.1
50.9
27.9
54.0
54.7
63.2
53.0
Appendix
Table 10: SpinQuant-based SandwichQuant results under W2A4KV4. Highlighted rows apply the complete two-stage pipeline with the model-specific learned rotation used by the corresponding SpinQuant baseline. Artifact and rotation identifiers are stored in the run manifests.
Model
Method
Perplexity ↓
Zero-shot Accuracy (%) ↑
Avg. ↑
Wiki2
C4
PIQA
ARC-E
ARC-C
HS
WG
BoolQ
FP16
5.47
7.27
78.9
74.6
46.1
75.9
69.2
77.7
70.4
RTN
8.22
11.53
76.3
66.5
40.6
68.7
65.8
67.5
64.2
RTN + SandwichQuant-Post
7.47
10.42
77.3
68.9
41.7
70.9
66.0
70.8
65.9
AWQ
6.79
8.93
77.1
69.9
41.8
71.2
67.7
71.5
66.3
AWQ + SandwichQuant-Post
6.53
8.71
77.2
70.7
43.0
72.4
67.2
72.8
67.2
Appendix
Table 11: One-sided SandwichQuant-Post results under W3A16 (group size 128). Each highlighted row freezes the completed backend in the preceding row and optimizes only Φpost . These component results are intentionally separated from the full SandwichQuant rows in Table 5 .
Model
Method
Perplexity ↓
Zero-shot Accuracy (%) ↑
Avg. ↑
Wiki2
C4
PIQA
ARC-E
ARC-C
HS
WG
BoolQ
FP16
5.47
7.27
78.9
74.6
46.1
75.9
69.2
77.7
70.4
QuaRot + GPTAQ
11.7
24.8
62.3
45.6
25.6
41.2
54.0
62.4
48.5
QuaRot + GPTAQ + SandwichQuant-Post
8.4
14.6
66.2
49.5
30.5
54.7
57.5
63.3
53.6
QuaRot + ResComp∗
11.5
23.6
63.6
46.4
24.9
40.8
56.0
61.9
48.9
Llama2-7B
QuaRot + ResComp∗ + SandwichQuant-Post
8.3
14.7
66.6
50.2
29.1
54.3
58.2
64.9
53.9
Appendix
Table 12: One-sided SandwichQuant-Post results under joint W2A4KV4 (group size 128). Each highlighted row freezes the completed QuaRot backend and optimizes only Φpost . Calibration uses 128 WikiText-2 sequences of length 2,048 (seed 0).
Low-bit quantization suffers severe accuracy degradation on compact networks, rooted in the dominant full-parameter coupled training paradigm that ignores parameter subspace heterogeneity. Their limited feature redundancy leaves little room to absorb quantization errors. Conventional pipelines adopt monolithic optimization: PTQ reconstructs fixed pretrained models without improving inherent quantization friendliness; QAT updates all parameters jointly, suffering from gradient coupling between backbone weights and calibration parameters. In this paper, we identify normalization affine parameters as a low-dimensional high-leverage subspace dominating quantization robustness, and propose Normalization Affine Preconditioning (NAP) for targeted subspace optimization. For PTQ, NAP freezes backbone weights and fine-tunes only affine parameters under the target fake-quantization graph on full-precision models, proactively boosting quantization friendliness before downstream reconstruction. For QAT, we introduce an alternating QAT-NAP schema that decouples feature learning and numerical calibration, breaking the performance ceiling of saturated joint training. Theoretical analysis confirms BN affine parameters fully cancel the channel-wise affine component of quantization distortion, while nonlinear rounding and clipping residuals form the irreducible error boundary; distillation-guided NAP acts as directional flatness optimization, projecting teacher-student logit mismatch onto the restricted subspace. Experiments on ImageNet and CIFAR-100 show NAP recovers severely collapsed low-bit quantization, consistently boosts reconstruction-based PTQ, and outperforms saturated full-parameter QAT with negligible tuning cost. This work reveals the principle of targeted low-dimensional subspace optimization, offering a new perspective beyond full-parameter coupled training for efficient deep learning.
Peng Xia, Junbiao Pang, Zheng Huang
School of Information Science and Technology, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, China
Post-training quantization (PTQ) compresses large language models by mapping weights to low-bit representations. While much work has focused on how weights are rounded onto the quantization grid, the scaling factor that defines the grid is typically chosen with simple, data-free heuristics. We observe that, under round-to-nearest (RTN) quantization, the grid assignments are piecewise constant in the scale, making the output reconstruction error piecewise quadratic over finitely many intervals, each admitting a closed-form optimization. Building on this insight, we present PiSO (Piecewise Scale Optimization), an algorithm that leverages calibration data to efficiently select channel-wise scales to achieve globally optimal output reconstruction error to arbitrary accuracy. We extend PiSO to group-wise quantization via tractable objectives. We also propose strategies for integrating it with error-correction methods such as GPTQ and Qronos, which greedily adjust weight assignments to compensate for the rounding errors of previously quantized weights. Experiments on Llama and Qwen models across multiple sizes and bit-widths show consistent improvements in perplexity and zero-shot accuracy, both standalone and combined with error correction, with gains increasing as the bit-width narrows. For instance, on Llama-3, PiSO reduces the 2-bit perplexity of Qronos by up to 7x, and at 3 bits, PiSO without error correction outperforms GPTQ with absmax scales.
Juan Amboage, Pablo Monteagudo-Lago, Ian Colbert +2
Low-rank quantization error compensation (LQEC) recovers the accuracy lost under aggressive weight quantization by attaching a closed-form rank-r adapter beside each frozen quantized weight, without any training. We show that existing compensators are limited by two shared simplifications. They calibrate symmetrically, evaluating the full-precision and compensated weights on the same activation, which yields a compensation target that is inherently high-rank -- so a fixed rank budget captures only a small fraction of it. And they minimize only the second-order term of the loss, although the compensated model is not stationary: a first-order descent direction larger than the applied compensation itself remains in every layer, and no reconstruction objective can absorb it. We propose a two-stage closed-form framework that removes both simplifications. Stage 1 aligns each layer's output with the full-precision model under a Fisher-weighted asymmetric objective, concentrating the rank budget on a rank-compressible target. Stage 2 re-measures statistics on the compensated model and applies a rank-constrained natural-gradient step that absorbs the remaining first-order signal. Every adapter is the result of a single truncated SVD; backward passes serve only to collect statistics. At 2 bits under QuIP#, our method reduces WikiText-2 perplexity from 12.43 to 10.26 on Qwen3-8B and from 21.11 to 13.22 on Qwen3-4B. On the held-out C4 corpus, it recovers 51% and 84% of the gap to FP16, versus 31% and 63% for the strongest baseline, with consistent gains in the seven-task zero-shot average, at higher bit-widths, and under a distinct quantizer.
Seobin Song, Geonho Lee, Janghwan Lee +1
Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea · Qualcomm AI Research, Qualcomm Korea YH, Seoul, Republic of Korea