Investigating the Impact of Quantization Methods on the Safety and Reliability of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15799v2
• Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 19:20:45 GMT
• Title: Investigating the Impact of Quantization Methods on the Safety and Reliability of Large Language Models
• Authors: Artyom Kharinaev, Viktor Moskvoretskii, Egor Shvetsov, Kseniia Studenikina, Bykov Mikhail, Evgeny Burnaev,
• Abstract summary: We release a human-curated safety dataset with 1.067 challenging questions to rigorously evaluate model behavior.<n>We assess 66 quantized variants of four large language models using four post-training quantization (PTQ) and two quantization-aware training (QAT) methods.<n>Our results show both PTQ and QAT can degrade safety alignment, with QAT techniques like QLORA or STE performing less safely.
• Score: 16.30545036335344
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful tools for modern applications, but their computational demands limit accessibility. Quantization offers efficiency gains, yet its impact on safety and trustworthiness remains poorly understood. To address this, we introduce OpenMiniSafety, a human-curated safety dataset with 1.067 challenging questions to rigorously evaluate model behavior. We publicly release human safety evaluations for four LLMs (both quantized and full-precision), totaling 4.268 annotated question-answer pairs. By assessing 66 quantized variants of these models using four post-training quantization (PTQ) and two quantization-aware training (QAT) methods across four safety benchmarks including human-centric evaluations we uncover critical safety performance trade-offs. Our results show both PTQ and QAT can degrade safety alignment, with QAT techniques like QLORA or STE performing less safely. No single method consistently outperforms others across benchmarks, precision settings, or models, highlighting the need for safety-aware compression strategies. Furthermore, precision-specialized methods (e.g., QUIK and AWQ for 4-bit, AQLM and Q-PET for 2-bit) excel at their target precision, meaning that these methods are not better at compressing but rather different approaches.

Related papers

• Q-resafe: Assessing Safety Risks and Quantization-aware Safety Patching for Quantized Large Language Models [37.68831497886983]
  Quantized large language models (LLMs) have gained increasing attention and significance for enabling deployment in resource-constrained environments.<n>We present comprehensive safety evaluations across various mainstream quantization techniques and diverse calibration datasets.<n>We propose a quantization-aware safety patching framework, Q-resafe, to efficiently restore the safety capabilities of quantized LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T08:52:22Z)
• Verifiable Safety Q-Filters via Hamilton-Jacobi Reachability and Multiplicative Q-Networks [8.042618833885168]
  We introduce a verifiable model-free safety filter based on Hamilton-Jacobi reachability analysis.<n>Our proposed approach successfully synthesizes formally verified, model-free safety certificates across four standard safe-control benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T18:12:50Z)
• Advancing Embodied Agent Security: From Safety Benchmarks to Input Moderation [52.83870601473094]
  Embodied agents exhibit immense potential across a multitude of domains. Existing research predominantly concentrates on the security of general large language models. This paper introduces a novel input moderation framework, meticulously designed to safeguard embodied agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-22T08:34:35Z)
• aiXamine: Simplified LLM Safety and Security [7.933485586826888]
  We present aiXamine, a comprehensive black-box evaluation platform for safety and security.<n>AiXamine integrates over 40 tests (i.e., benchmarks) organized into eight key services targeting specific dimensions of safety and security.<n>The platform aggregates the evaluation results into a single detailed report per model, providing a breakdown of model performance, test examples, and rich visualizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T09:26:05Z)
• Safe Vision-Language Models via Unsafe Weights Manipulation [75.04426753720551]
  We revise safety evaluation by introducing Safe-Ground, a new set of metrics that evaluate safety at different levels of granularity.<n>We take a different direction and explore whether it is possible to make a model safer without training, introducing Unsafe Weights Manipulation (UWM)<n>UWM uses a calibration set of safe and unsafe instances to compare activations between safe and unsafe content, identifying the most important parameters for processing the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T17:00:22Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs through Minimum Bayes Risk: Bridging Confidence and Consistency [66.96286531087549]
  Uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) encompass a variety of approaches.<n>We propose a novel approach to integrating model confidence with output consistency, resulting in a family of efficient and robust UQ methods.<n>We evaluate our approach across various tasks such as question answering, abstractive summarization, and machine translation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T14:30:12Z)
• Rethinking Bottlenecks in Safety Fine-Tuning of Vision Language Models [25.606641582511106]
  We propose a novel dataset that integrates multi-image inputs with safety Chain-of-Thought (CoT) labels as fine-grained reasoning logic to improve model performance.<n>Our experiments demonstrate that fine-tuning InternVL2.5-8B with MIS significantly outperforms both powerful open-source models and API-based models in challenging multi-image tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T17:59:45Z)
• On the Adversarial Robustness of Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models for Code [4.286327408435937]
  We assess the impact of diverse input challenges on the functionality and correctness of generated code using rigorous metrics and established benchmarks.<n>Open-source models demonstrate an increased susceptibility to input perturbations, resulting in declines in functional correctness ranging from 12% to 34%.<n>In contrast, commercial models demonstrate relatively greater resilience, with performance degradation ranging from 3% to 24%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-29T07:00:47Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• LLMC: Benchmarking Large Language Model Quantization with a Versatile Compression Toolkit [55.73370804397226]
  Quantization, a key compression technique, can effectively mitigate these demands by compressing and accelerating large language models. We present LLMC, a plug-and-play compression toolkit, to fairly and systematically explore the impact of quantization. Powered by this versatile toolkit, our benchmark covers three key aspects: calibration data, algorithms (three strategies), and data formats.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T11:49:05Z)
• Towards Precise Observations of Neural Model Robustness in Classification [2.127049691404299]
  In deep learning applications, robustness measures the ability of neural models that handle slight changes in input data. Our approach contributes to a deeper understanding of model robustness in safety-critical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-25T09:37:44Z)
• Decoding Compressed Trust: Scrutinizing the Trustworthiness of Efficient LLMs Under Compression [109.23761449840222]
  This study conducts the first, thorough evaluation of leading Large Language Models (LLMs) We find that quantization is currently a more effective approach than pruning in achieving efficiency and trustworthiness simultaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T01:38:19Z)
• When Parameter-efficient Tuning Meets General-purpose Vision-language Models [65.19127815275307]
  PETAL revolutionizes the training process by requiring only 0.5% of the total parameters, achieved through a unique mode approximation technique. Our experiments reveal that PETAL not only outperforms current state-of-the-art methods in most scenarios but also surpasses full fine-tuning models in effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-16T17:13:08Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• ASSERT: Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models [65.79770974145983]
  ASSERT, Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming, consists of three methods -- semantically aligned augmentation, target bootstrapping, and adversarial knowledge injection. We partition our prompts into four safety domains for a fine-grained analysis of how the domain affects model performance. We find statistically significant performance differences of up to 11% in absolute classification accuracy among semantically related scenarios and error rates of up to 19% absolute error in zero-shot adversarial settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-14T17:10:28Z)
• Reliability in Semantic Segmentation: Are We on the Right Track? [15.0189654919665]
  We analyze a broad variety of models, spanning from older ResNet-based architectures to novel transformers. We find that while recent models are significantly more robust, they are not overall more reliable in terms of uncertainty estimation. This is the first study on modern segmentation models focused on both robustness and uncertainty estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T17:38:24Z)
• Evaluating Model-free Reinforcement Learning toward Safety-critical Tasks [70.76757529955577]
  This paper revisits prior work in this scope from the perspective of state-wise safe RL. We propose Unrolling Safety Layer (USL), a joint method that combines safety optimization and safety projection. To facilitate further research in this area, we reproduce related algorithms in a unified pipeline and incorporate them into SafeRL-Kit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-12T06:30:17Z)
• Leveraging Industry 4.0 -- Deep Learning, Surrogate Model and Transfer Learning with Uncertainty Quantification Incorporated into Digital Twin for Nuclear System [2.530807828621263]
  The emergence of Internet of Things (IoT) and Machine Learning (ML) has made the concept of surrogate modeling even more viable. This chapter begins with a brief overview of the concept of surrogate modeling, transfer learning, IoT and digital twins. After that, a detailed overview of uncertainties, uncertainty quantification frameworks, and specifics of uncertainty quantification methodologies for a surrogate model linked to a digital twin is presented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T20:19:04Z)
• Fast Uncertainty Quantification for Deep Object Pose Estimation [91.09217713805337]
  Deep learning-based object pose estimators are often unreliable and overconfident. In this work, we propose a simple, efficient, and plug-and-play UQ method for 6-DoF object pose estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-16T06:51:55Z)
• Evaluating the Safety of Deep Reinforcement Learning Models using Semi-Formal Verification [81.32981236437395]
  We present a semi-formal verification approach for decision-making tasks based on interval analysis. Our method obtains comparable results over standard benchmarks with respect to formal verifiers. Our approach allows to efficiently evaluate safety properties for decision-making models in practical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-19T11:18:06Z)
• SAMBA: Safe Model-Based & Active Reinforcement Learning [59.01424351231993]
  SAMBA is a framework for safe reinforcement learning that combines aspects from probabilistic modelling, information theory, and statistics. We evaluate our algorithm on a variety of safe dynamical system benchmarks involving both low and high-dimensional state representations. We provide intuition as to the effectiveness of the framework by a detailed analysis of our active metrics and safety constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-12T10:40:46Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.