arXiv preprint ·
Detecting Unreliable Classifications from Quantized Models
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Post-training INT8 quantization is typically validated by checking accuracy retention, which requires ground-truth labels often unavailable in low-resource clinical settings. We show a label-free alternative: comparing a model's own output before and after quantization. We compute cosine similarity between the FP32 and INT8 models' output probability vectors for each prediction, which requires only a single forward pass. This output-agreement similarity separates lower-accuracy predictions across four evaluated architectures (ResNet-50, VGG-16-BN, Wide ResNet-50, and ViT-B/16) under fixed-percentile splits, outperforming a confidence-only baseline for all four. These results show that quantized models can be compared to their baselines to assess their drift and determine whether they are well suited for clinical deployment.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computer Vision
CÆNL: Collapse-Based Active Neural Learning with Objective-Aligned Representation Control
SonoWorld: Towards Interactive Pose-Controllable Ultrasound World Models
Gaussian Splatting for Real-Time Scene Reconstruction: Methods, Systems, and Trade-offs
NavAble: A Large-Scale Dataset and Synthetic Data Generation Pipeline for Blind Navigation
TwinPrune: Density-Aware Two-Phase Token Pruning for Vision-Language Models
Get the few papers worth your time in Computer Vision every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.