MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131074035 · doi:10.1109/iccvw69036.2025.00422

Enhancing Generalization in Data-Free Quantization via Mixup-Class Prompting

2025· article· W7131074035 on OpenAlexaff
Jiwoong Park, Chaeun Lee, Yongseok Choi, Sein Park, Deokki Hong, Jungwook Choi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Data Compression Techniques
Canadian institutionsHyperion Technologies (Canada)
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South Korea
KeywordsQuantization (signal processing)Generalizability theoryGenerative grammarSynthetic dataConvolutional neural networkVector quantizationAdversarial systemGeneralizationSource code

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-training quantization (PTQ) improves efficiency but struggles with limited calibration data, especially under privacy constraints. Data-free quantization (DFQ) mitigates this by generating synthetic images using generative models such as generative adversarial networks (GANs) and text-conditioned latent diffusion models (LDMs), while applying existing PTQ algorithms. However, the relationship between generated synthetic images and the generalizability of the quantized model during PTQ remains under-explored. Without investigating this relationship, synthetic images generated by previous prompt engineering methods based on single-class prompts suffer from issues such as polysemy, leading to performance degradation. We propose mixup-class prompt, a mixup-based text prompting strategy that fuses multiple class labels at the text prompt level to generate diverse, robust synthetic data. This approach enhances generalization, and improves optimization stability in PTQ. We provide quantitative insights through gradient norm and generalization error analysis. Experiments on convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and vision transformers (ViTs) show that our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art DFQ methods like GenQ. Furthermore, it pushes the performance boundary in extremely low-bit scenarios, achieving new state-of-the-art accuracy in challenging 2-bit weight, 4-bit activation (W2A4) quantization. Our code is available at https://github.com/aiha-lab/Mixup-class-Prompting

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.299 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Data Compression TechniquesFrench-language works237,207