Effective and Efficient Mixed Precision Quantization of Speech Foundation Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a novel mixed-precision quantization approach for speech foundation models that tightly integrates mixed-precision learning and quantized model parameter estimation into one single model compression stage. Experiments conducted on LibriSpeech dataset with fine-tuned wav2vec2.0-base and HuBERT-large models suggest the resulting mixed-precision quantized models increased the lossless compression ratio by factors up to 1.7x and 1.9x over the respective uniform-precision and two-stage mixed-precision quantized baselines that perform precision learning and model parameters quantization in separate and disjointed stages, while incurring no statistically word error rate (WER) increase over the 32-bit full-precision models. The system compression time of wav2vec2.0-base and HuBERT-large models is reduced by up to 1.9 and 1.5 times over the two-stage mixed-precision baselines, while both produce lower WERs. The best-performing 3.5-bit mixed-precision quantized HuBERT-large model produces a lossless compression ratio of 8.6x over the 32-bit full-precision system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".