Layerwise Error Attribution for Fast and Robust Mixed-Precision Post-Training Quantization

Mixed-precision quantization improves the accuracy of post-training quantization by allocating higher bitwidths to sensitive layers, but existing methods solve the allocation for a single fixed memory budget. In practice the budget varies across deployments and is unknown at calibration time. Adaptive quantization addresses this with one offline calibration that serves any budget, yet current methods score layer sensitivity in a manner that does not consider its dependency on quantization levels of other layers. We show that a layer's sensitivity depends strongly on the bitwidths of its upstream layers and that this dependence shifts the resulting preferred bit allocation. We propose MixQuant, a technique-agnostic adaptive framework that wraps any base quantizer. MixQuant marginalizes each layer's distortion over random quantized upstream configurations to obtain budget-agnostic scores, calibrates the quantizer's parameters on plans the allocator itself produces, and penalizes allocations that leave layers at the lowest bitwidths. A single greedy pass then serves any budget at deployment. Across Llama-3.2-3B, Llama-2-7B, and Mistral-7B under AWQ and GPTQ, MixQuant outperforms adaptive and mixed-precision baselines in every setting, improving average accuracy by up to 8 points and reducing perplexity from 12.43 to 10.70 at the tightest budget, while matching an ILP solver at negligible deployment cost.

Mixed-precision quantization must decide which parts of a model to keep at higher precision. A common premise, shared by sensitivity-based methods such as HAWQ and CoopQ, is that the loss from quantizing a set of layers can be reconstructed from per-layer or pairwise sensitivities measured in isolation. We test this premise at the 4-bit weight-and-activation precisions now being deployed, treating the change in loss $f(S)$ from quantizing a layer set $S$ as a set function on the Boolean cube and analyzing it through two classical changes of basis. This analysis yields two findings. First, across configurations drawn from the deployment distribution, 85--93% of the variance of $f$ is explained by per-layer effects alone. Second, a monotone transform of a sum of per-layer terms reproduces $f$'s ranking of configurations, misordering at most 2% of pairs. We propose the coverage model $f(S)=c\bigl(1-\prod_{i\in S}(1-a_i)\bigr)$, which reproduces the measured variance profile of $f$ to within a few percent from its $L$ fitted break-rates. This structure supports two predictors of a configuration's loss, each with $L+1$ parameters. The additive model is the optimal first-order predictor. By Parseval's identity its mean-squared error equals the variance of $f$ left unexplained by per-layer effects, which we measure on full lattices, estimate out of sample at full-network scale, and report with every result as a certificate of how well any additive model can do. The coverage model itself is the second predictor. As allocators at matched memory, they attain the lowest KL divergence among the compared allocators on models from 30B to 355B parameters. Below four bits, the resulting allocations continue to solve code and reasoning tasks at budgets where allocations from gradient sensitivities no longer produce terminating generations.

Mixed-precision quantization requires discrete allocation of weight and activation bit-widths, followed by recovery of the selected network. We develop a task-aware quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) surrogate with separate weight and activation profiles, a bit-operation (BOP) cost, and selected structural priors. QUBO provides a network-wide allocation that can be refined through direct validation-based PROTES search. On a compact NAFBlock-based denoiser, the refined route achieves 37.192 dB after LSQ+ at 4.035% routed-layer BOPs, versus 37.092 dB at 4.101% for a HAWQ-style baseline. The repeated-search primary experiment shows that LSQ+ largely closes the quality gap between QUBO allocation and expensive direct refinement. An additional restoration architecture retains a larger recovered gain, indicating that refinement's value depends on architecture and recovery. We evaluate quality, achieved cost, routing stability and optimization expense together. Deployment measurements characterize a fake-quantized floating-point implementation; BOP reductions describe analytical allocation savings.