MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411757453 · doi:10.1145/3746638

Latency-Aware Pruning and Quantization of Self-Supervised Speech Transformers for Edge Devices

2025· article· en· W4411757453 on OpenAlexaff
Seyed Milad Ebrahimipour, Seyyed Hasan Mozafari, James J. Clark, Warren J. Gross, Brett H. Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech Recognition and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceQuantization (signal processing)TransformerSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing adoption of self-supervised learning transformers for speech (speech SSL) is constrained by their significant computational and memory demands, making deployment on resource-constrained edge devices challenging. We propose a latency-aware compression framework that integrates structured pruning and quantization to address these challenges. Guided by a latency model that considers the combined effects of pruning and quantization, our method dynamically identifies and removes less critical blocks while maintaining task performance, avoiding the inefficiencies of over-pruning and under-pruning seen in prior approaches. Unlike prior methods specialized in either post-training compression without fine-tuning data or in cases where fine-tuning data is available, our method is effective in both settings. Experimental results show that, in task-agnostic compression, our method achieves a 4.2× speedup on the Hikey970 edge development platform, outperforming previous task-agnostic pruning methods in most tasks, while requiring only 21–24 GPU hours—a 3× reduction compared to prior methods. Additionally, our method achieves a lower word error rate of 7.8% using task-specific pruning, while reducing computational overhead by approximately 19.4% in terms of GFLOPs compared to previous task-specific methods. Finally, our method consistently achieves higher accuracy than the state-of-the-art post-training compression approach across various latency speedup constraints, even without fine-tuning data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing SystemsSame topicSpeech Recognition and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207