Organizations: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · Northwestern Polytechnical University · Institute of Artificial Intelligence (TeleAI), China Telecom · Tsinghua University
Multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) with impressive perception and understanding capabilities will enable a range of downstream applications. However, their substantial computational and memory requirements hinder the real-world implementation, particularly for resource-constrained edge devices. Quantization has emerged as an effective solution for deploying large models. While post-training quantization (PTQ) successfully retains the performance at moderate bit-width (e.g., W8A8), it suffers from severe performance degradation under low-bit quantization (e.g., W4A8), especially for small-scale models that are more suitable for edge deployment. In this paper, we propose ProQuant, a novel weight-activation quantization-aware training (QAT) framework tailored for low-bit MLLMs. First, to align the limited finetuning dataset distribution with the pretrained dataset distribution, we propose a self-relabeling (SRL) scheme to resample the responses of the open-source multimodal dataset. Second, we are the first to take a decoupled view of multi-modal (MM) understanding and language modeling abilities. We propose a progressive block activation (PBA) mechanism to prioritize the MM understanding recovery. We also introduce a vision-sensitive factor τ that effectively identifies the MM-critical layers. Extensive experiments across various benchmarks, covering models with 2B-8B parameters, show that ProQuant significantly outperforms existing methods. For example, our W4A8 Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct improves average accuracy by impressively 6.6% and achieves performance comparable to full precision counterparts with only approximately 1% performance drop. Code is available at https://github.com/yufeixue-ai/ProQuant/.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Naive QAT v.s. ProQuant .
Figure 2: Overview of the proposed ProQuant . Left: examples of responses from GPT-4 [ Bubeck et al., 2023 ] and re-sampled via the SRL scheme (Section 3.1 ) using Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct (see more details in Appendix B ). Right: QAT with the PBA mechanism, where quantization is first activated for decoding layers with the larger vision-sensitivity factor τ . As training proceeds, quantization is gradually enabled for the remaining layers in descending order of τ (Section 3.2 ).
Figure 3: Accuracy of Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct W4A8 checkpoints on HellaSwag [ Zellers et al., 2019 ] (left) and AI2D [ Kembhavi et al., 2016 ] (right) benchmarks over training iterations.
Figure 4: Loss trajectories of TSB/VSB-prioritized QAT over the first 300 steps.
Figure 5: Normalized vision sensitivity τ and weight gradient norm ∥Gw∥ℓ1 across decoding layers.
Figure 6: Training loss comparison of Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct between naive QAT and ProQuant under W4A8 and W4A4. PBA exhibits faster warm-up convergence toward the pre-trained level, rapid recovery during PBA, and better final convergence.
Arch
#BW
Method
AI2D
ChQ
DocV
M3U
SciQ
Seed
TxtV
Avg. ( ↑ )
MME
Qwen2-VL-2B
BF16
-
70.04
72.16
89.40
39.89
74.23
69.98
79.38
70.73
1870.19
W4A8
SmoothQ
62.66
53.68
76.59
34.00
66.47
63.20
69.17
60.82
1736.61
MBQ
65.12
62.08
79.76
35.22
68.99
64.64
71.91
63.96
1810.68
MQuant
67.36
70.44
87.39
38.33
–
–
77.72
–
–
LLM-QAT
66.94
68.20
87.14
35.56
69.37
68.27
77.94
67.63
1931.70
ProQuant
69.30
70.32
88.10
39.00
72.79
69.19
78.60
69.61
1830.28
Table 1: Weight-activation quantization results for Qwen VL series. The headers represent model architectures, bitwidth, quantization methods, AI2D, ChartQA, DocVQA, MMMU, ScienceQA, SeedBench, TextVQA, average accuracy, and MME scores, respectively. The superscript † indicates down_proj activations are quantized to 8-bit under W4A4 settings.
Method
AI2D
ChQ
DocV
M3U
SciQ
Seed
TxtV
Avg. ( ↑ )
MME
Qwen2-VL-2B-Instruct
70.73
1870.19
MBQ
69.88
72.28
86.89
39.33
74.09
68.82
77.13
69.77
1884.59
ProQuant
69.66
72.08
88.91
38.89
73.21
69.88
79.34
70.28
1864.33
Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct
76.33
2149.00
MBQ
78.27
83.00
92.69
46.78
82.55
71.12
78.60
76.14
2156.88
ProQuant
78.30
83.52
92.25
48.11
82.34
71.08
78.42
76.29
2102.85
Table 2: W8A8 quantization results on three model backbones. Values in red denote the corresponding full-precision (BF16) performance.
#BW
Method
AI2D
ChQ
DocV
M3U
SciQ
Seed
TxtV
Avg. ( ↑ )
MME
W4g128
MBQ
64.35
74.88
91.23
36.67
68.57
70.22
76.94
68.98
1955.42
ProQuant
71.76
76.44
91.26
38.67
77.08
72.11
77.97
72.18
1958.53
W3g128
MBQ
32.25
61.00
76.21
28.00
46.59
62.91
65.48
53.21
1350.49
ProQuant
65.90
71.92
88.29
35.67
68.45
70.23
75.60
68.01
1922.82
Table 3: Weight-only quantization results of MBQ and ProQuant under W4g128 and W3g128 settings.
#BW
Method
AI2D
ChQ
DocV
M3U
SciQ
Seed
TxtV
Avg. ( ↑ )
MME
FP
-
83.71
84.80
95.53
50.22
92.88
75.31
82.48
80.70
2381.20
W4A8
MBQ
77.62
75.40
92.71
45.78
87.31
72.55
78.00
75.62
2162.47
ProQuant
82.19
84.12
95.20
49.33
91.44
75.16
81.18
79.80
2325.49
W4A4
MBQ
2.20
0.00
0.03
26.22
3.56
8.30
0.00
5.76
0.00
ProQuant
62.44
57.36
88.22
40.89
76.77
67.53
75.32
66.93
1877.45
Table 4: W/A quantization results on Qwen3-VL- 8B -Instruct .
#BW
Qwen2-VL-2B
Qwen2.5-VL-3B
Qwen3-VL-2B
Avg.
Δ
Avg.
Δ
Avg.
Δ
W4A4 †
54.45
–
55.08
–
59.83
–
W4A4 †
55.89
+1.44
64.47
+9.39
63.04
+3.21
Table 5: Mixed-precision quantization results on three backbones. The superscript † denotes the W4A4 † setting, where down_proj activations are kept at 8-bit.
Figure 7: The step-by-step ablation studies on SRL and PBA.
Metric
Prior
Avg. ( ↑ )
Random
-
71.88
∥Gw∥ℓ1
Lower
72.10
∥Gw∥ℓ1
Higher
72.19
τ
Lower
72.03
τ (Ours)
Higher
72.54
Table 6: Ablation studies on block activation metric
Table 7: Ablation studies on SRL labeler, PBA scheduler, and block granularity.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure A1 : Extended example of resampled datasets in Section 3 .
#BW
SQ Init
Avg. ( ↑ )
MME
W4A8
✓
71.41
1956.58
✗
72.54
1962.04
W4A4
✗
50.87
1459.14
✓
59.83
1652.63
Appendix
Table A1 : ProQuant w/ or w/o SmoothQuant.
Supervision
Formulation
Avg. ( ↑ )
KL Div.
LKL=D(Pt∣∣Ps)
71.76
Reversed KL
LReKL=D(Ps∣∣Pt)
71.41
CAKLD Du et al. [2024]
LCAKLD=αLReKL+(1−α)LKL
71.94
Multi-obj. Guo et al. [2025]
LQAT=LCAKLD+βLCE
72.54
Appendix
Table A2 : QAT performance under different supervisions.
Figure A3 : Test environment. A Linux-based ZU5EV FPGA board supplies data and instructions to the test-chip board and receives results. The PC supports debugging and control, the DC supply powers the system board, and the oscilloscope observes state signals. The voltage tuning circuit supports 0.6–1.0 V; this range is not a statement of the operating voltage used in every experiment.
Stage
#V Tok.
#T Tok.
BF16
W4A8
W4A4
Lat.
Eng.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Prefill
256
256
877.02
2400.87
530.80
1.65 ×
1020.90
2.35 ×
350.51
2.50 ×
779.96
3.08 ×
1024
1977.79
4817.34
1144.89
1.73 ×
1888.29
2.55 ×
632.23
3.13 ×
1164.54
4.14 ×
1024
256
2559.89
6045.12
1726.99
1.48 ×
3116.07
1.94 ×
1214.34
2.11 ×
2392.32
2.53 ×
1024
3766.04
8654.54
2441.82
1.54 ×
4069.73
2.13 ×
1522.48
2.47 ×
2831.59
3.06 ×
Decode
256
256
124.55
493.04
31.79
3.92 ×
124.33
3.97 ×
31.40
3.97 ×
123.95
3.98 ×
Appendix
Table A7 : Performance comparison of BF16, W4A8, and W4A4 for Qwen2-VL-2B-Instruct in both prefill and decode stages. “#V Tok.” and “#T Tok.” denote the numbers of vision tokens and text tokens, respectively; “Lat.” and “Eng.” denote latency (ms) and energy (mJ), respectively; “Spd.” and “Sav.” denote the speedup and energy saving relative to the BF16 baseline, respectively.
Stage
#V Tok.
#T Tok.
BF16
W4A8
W4A4
Lat.
Eng.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Prefill
256
256
1663.57
4802.11
882.53
1.89 ×
1580.31
3.04 ×
507.40
3.28 ×
1030.43
4.66 ×
1024
3959.49
10486.84
2132.48
1.86 ×
3347.68
3.13 ×
1088.50
3.64 ×
1859.23
5.64 ×
1024
256
4439.11
11419.90
2612.11
1.70 ×
4280.74
2.67 ×
1568.12
2.83 ×
2792.29
4.09 ×
1024
6972.05
17529.33
4034.06
1.73 ×
6226.26
2.82 ×
2193.81
3.18 ×
3719.84
4.71 ×
Decode
256
256
248.69
984.06
63.25
3.93 ×
247.63
3.97 ×
62.45
3.98 ×
246.85
3.99 ×
Appendix
Table A8 : Performance comparison of BF16, W4A8, and W4A4 for Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct in both prefill and decode stages.
Stage
#V Tok.
#T Tok.
BF16
W4A8
W4A4
Lat.
Eng.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Lat.
Spd.
Eng.
Sav.
Prefill
256
256
869.62
2227.72
498.60
1.74 ×
860.56
2.59 ×
300.42
2.89 ×
569.67
3.91 ×
1024
2090.36
4832.36
1190.86
1.76 ×
1791.66
2.70 ×
612.83
3.41 ×
1038.96
4.65 ×
1024
256
2444.41
5570.82
1544.91
1.58 ×
2530.13
2.20 ×
966.88
2.53 ×
1777.43
3.13 ×
1024
3798.92
8333.40
2370.94
1.60 ×
3559.28
2.34 ×
1313.97
2.89 ×
2231.03
3.74 ×
Decode
256
256
140.46
556.20
35.89
3.91 ×
141.56
3.93 ×
35.89
3.91 ×
141.56
3.93 ×
Appendix
Table A9 : Performance comparison of BF16, W4A8, and W4A4 for Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct in both prefill and decode stages.
Large Language Models (LLMs) with multimodal capabilities have revolutionized vision-language tasks, but their deployment often requires huge memory and computational resources. Post-training quantization (PTQ) has successfully compressed language models to as low as 1-bit precision, its effectiveness for multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) remains unexplored. In this paper, we present the first method for ultra-low-bit (<4-bit) quantization of MLLMs. Our analysis reveals that multimodal tokens and intermediate layer activations produced by them exhibit significantly higher entropy compared to text tokens, indicating greater functional complexity that makes MLLMs less tolerant to ultra-low bit quantization. However, this entropy varies significantly across layers, with some layers producing lower-entropy activation distributions that we empirically show can better tolerate ultra-low bit quantization. Existing PTQ methods optimize weight quantization within each layer but apply the same target precision uniformly, ignoring this variation in complexity across layers. Building on this insight, we propose LUQ: Layerwise Ultra-Low Bit Quantization, which characterizes each transformer layer's functional complexity via its output activation entropy and selectively applies ultra-low bit quantization to layers encoding simpler, more compressible functions. We also show that multimodal calibration (image and text tokens) boosts VQA performance in the ultra-low bit regime. Evaluated on LLaVA-1.5 and Qwen-2.5-VL across 9 VQA benchmarks, LUQ models use 40% and 31% less memory than their 4-bit counterparts while exhibiting less than 10% degradation on MME.
Shubhang Bhatnagar, Andy Xu, Kar-Han Tan +1
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · Work done as an intern at HP Inc. · University of California, Los Angeles +1
Quantization has emerged as a mainstream approach for deploying Large Language Models (LLMs) on resource-constrained devices, yet compressing precision below 4-bit typically causes severe performance degradation or prohibitive retraining costs. In this paper, we propose EdgeRazor, a lightweight framework for LLMs via Mixed-Precision Quantization-Aware Distillation. It contains three modules: Structural Quantization with Mixed Precision for fine-grained control of bit-widths, Layer-Adaptive Feature Distillation that dynamically selects the most informative features for alignment, and Entropy-Aware KL Divergence for forward-reverse balance on both human-annotated and distilled datasets. Evaluations conducted on MobileLLM and Qwen families show that under weight-activation quantization, the 1.88-bit Qwen3-0.6B-EdgeRazor outperforms the state-of-the-art 2-bit baselines by 11.27 and surpasses the strongest 3-bit baselines by 4.38, while the quantized MobileLLM-350M-EdgeRazor requires a training budget 4-10× lower than the leading quantization-aware training method. In terms of efficiency, EdgeRazor achieves higher compression ratios at all bit-widths, and the 1.58-bit Qwen3-0.6B-EdgeRazor reduces storage from 1.11 GB to 0.19 GB while accelerating decoding by 15.16× over the 16-bit baseline. These results empirically validate the effectiveness and efficiency of EdgeRazor. The codes can be accessed from GitHub and Huggingface.
Shu-Hao Zhang, Le-Tong Huang, Xiang-Sheng Deng +5
National Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210063, China · School of Intelligent Science and Technology, Nanjing University, Suzhou 215163, China · Microsoft AI, Beijing 100080, China +1
Low-bit quantization offers a promising avenue for reducing the computational and memory demands of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). Recent hardware support for low-precision formats, ranging from MXFP8 to ultra-low-bit formats such as MXFP4 and HiF4, has accelerated research into efficient MLLM training and deployment. In this work, we present a systematic study of these quantization schemes in representative MLLMs that span both video generation and reasoning tasks. Our analysis shows that MXFP8 achieves near-lossless performance, whereas aggressive 4-bit quantization leads to significant degradation. Through extensive ablations, we identify activation quantization as the primary source of this performance loss, contributing substantially more than weight quantization. Motivated by this observation, we propose Residual Fallback Quantization (RFQ), a lightweight activation reconstruction framework that supplements the primary ulta-low-bit activation representation with an auxiliary quantized residual pathway. By explicitly modeling and compensating for quantization errors, RFQ improves activation fidelity while preserving the efficiency advantages of ultra-low-bit computation. RFQ requires no architectural modifications and incurs negligible computational overhead. Extensive experiments on Wan2.2 and Qwen3-VL demonstrate that RFQ consistently recovers a substantial portion of the performance lost under the quantization of MXFP4 and HiF4, significantly narrowing the gap to BF16 baselines across both generation and 4 reasoning benchmarks. Our findings establish activation quantization as the dominant bottleneck in ultra-low-bit MLLMs and highlight residual-based activation reconstruction as an effective and practical strategy for robust 4-bit deployment.