Skip to content
Preprint

When Compression Scores Cannot Decide: Information Boundaries for Group-Robust LLM Pruning

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 37 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work asks what a compression statistic can justify when deployment cares about the worst supplied group, and treats each statistic as an information interface.

Abstract

A stable compression score can still select the worse model. In our dense study, a split-half reliable path-quadratic score predicted a 16.1\% gain, while the selected endpoints were 6.0--7.7% worse than two controls. We ask what a compression statistic can justify when deployment cares about the worst supplied group. We treat each statistic as an information interface. Its observation leaves a fiber of compatible endpoint-risk tables, and only orders fixed across that fiber are identified. Cone and fiber identities quantify the remaining uncertainty, while matched observations reverse endpoint order for pooled moments, group-local moments, and reference-path curvature. Sequential composition adds one state variable: the slack from each group risk to the current maximum. This vector determines every unrestricted one-step response, and a margin condition keeps the active group fixed along paths with bounded relative drift. The experiments follow the same ladder. Across three dense LLMs, an early-preserving allocation reduces worst-group perplexity inflation by 12.6--20.9%; target-matched complete-menu selection improves over its references by 2.7--8.0%. Across all 16 routed layers of OLMoE, pooled endpoint refresh lowers held-out worst-group teacher KL by 15.8% over the best static score. A compute-matched hard-max trajectory ends 32.7% worse than pooled, and neither adaptive trajectory improves excess NLL. Local evidence can narrow a menu. Complete endpoints rank that menu, while multistep claims also require control of the evolving active face and future candidates.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

Beyond Sparse Weights: When Is Attention Compressible?

KV-cache compression is often justified by attention maps with a few large weights. This is incomplete: large weights may not contain most of the mass, omitted values can cancel, and preserving the attention output may not preserve the task. We separate these questions. Global score gaps -- not threshold counts -- determine how many tokens are needed to retain a target mass. For a realized row, the weighted sum of omitted values is the exact missing statistic. A controlled retrieval--aggregation model explains when truncation helps and when it hurts. These results motivate CertKV, a training-free compressor that reserves one tail-summary slot per head and allocates the rest by value dispersion. Under matched budgets, CertKV is top-two in seven of nine LongBench-v2 settings, remains in the leading compressed tier on 128K RULER, and realizes a ten-fold cache budget in a packed Llama prototype. Compressibility depends on the mass, values, future queries, and task -- not on a sparse-looking map alone.

Chiwun Yang, Xiaoyu Li · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

The Embedder's Dilemma: LLMs Are Better, but at What Cost?

These results support a division of labour: use embedding models for similarity, classification, and clustering, and reserve LLMs for reasoning-intensive retrieval, and reserve LLMs for reasoning-intensive retrieval.

Adnan El Assadi, Niklas Muennighoff, Jinhyuk Lee · 1 citation
Preprint Aug 2026

The Cost of Adaptivity: Matching Lower Bounds Across Learning Problems

A finite-horizon composition law for Gaussian certification from M independent coordinates, a familywise certifier protecting every coordinate and time up to T pays optimal normalized squared half-width of order log(eM) + log log(e^eT), within the sample-mean-centered rectangular class.

Ibne Farabi Shihab, Adria Binte Habib · 0 citations
Preprint Jul 2026

Flat Score, Amplified Failures: How the Error Budget Masks Damage in Quantized LLM Agents

Post-training quantization to 4-bit weights is widely reported to be nearly lossless. We test this claim for multi-turn, tool-calling agents, where it now matters most. On $\tau^2$-bench, across two open-weight model families in dense and MoE variants and two domains (eight cells, 456 episodes each, at 16-, 8-, and 4-bit weights), quantization indeed looks free on the standard metric. No cell shows a score change that survives multiple-comparison correction, and in the cell that carries the largest process damage, equivalence testing bounds the change within $\pm$7.5 points. The process tells a different story. Quantization amplifies the failure the model already exhibits at full precision (tool-name hallucination in telecom, with the same directional trend in retail entity errors) by up to 2.5$\times$ in volume (+17.6 points per task), while creating essentially no new failures. The failure set is the same at every precision (rank correlation $\geq$ 0.94, 0.18% novel events). The score stays flat because the benchmark's ten-error budget absorbs the extra failures. Shrinking the budget to two errors re-exposes a score gap of 17 points, and it does so only in the one cell where quantization added error volume, exactly as the masking account predicts. A targeted error-repair prompt, run for five telecom models at every precision, removes the damage exactly and only where it lives. Both diagnostics, the per-channel error rate and success under a shrinking budget, come from logs benchmarks already collect; we suggest reporting them alongside task reward.

Jiwon Jang, Kisu Yang, Heuiseok Lim et al. · 1 citation