MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131095932 · doi:10.1109/iccvw69036.2025.00594

LiteRT-Optimized INT8 LLM for Raspberry Pi4 Deployment

2025· article· W7131095932 on OpenAlexaff
Kihwan Yoon, Hyeon-Cheol Moon, Aeri Kim, Sungjei Kim, S. W. Lee, Sung‐Joon Jang, Ganzorig Gankhuyag, Jinwoo Jeong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization
Canadian institutionsBlueDot (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge computingEdge deviceRaspberry piAcceleration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities across a wide range of natural language processing tasks. However, their high computational and memory requirements pose significant challenges for deployment on resource-constrained edge devices such as the Raspberry Pi. In this work, we investigate post-training quantization techniques to reduce the computational burden of LLMs while preserving their quality. We evaluate several LLMs under different precision settings and show that 8-bit quantization, especially when combined with runtime-level optimizations like LiteRT achieves up to 2× faster inference on Raspberry Pi, compared to framework-native formats, without relying on hardware-specific acceleration libraries (e.g., GPU, NNAPI, or EdgeTPU), and with negligible degradation in output quality. Our experiments highlight the practicality of lightweight LLM deployment on edge devices. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of real-time applications on low-power devices, enabling broader accessibility in edge environments. Our project page is available at https://rlghksdbs.github.io/EfficientLLM/.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Packet Processing and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207