arXiv preprint ·
What Does 4-Bit Microscaling Cost a Wearable Activity Recognizer?
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Wearable sports sensors can recognize actions on the device itself, where lower-precision numbers reduce model storage and memory traffic. Two 4-bit block-scaled formats, MXFP4 from the Open Compute Project, introduced in 2023, and NVFP4 from NVIDIA, introduced in 2025, are drawing interest. Published evaluations cover general deep-learning benchmarks and large language models; to our knowledge, nobody has yet measured what they cost a small wearable-sensor model. We train a 159,492-parameter 1D CNN to recognize four basketball actions from wrist-accelerometer data in Hang-Time HAR and test it on players it has never seen, using five-fold cross-validation grouped by player. Every comparison between number formats is made fold by fold. In full precision the model reaches 69.26\% macro-F1. Measured TFLite FP16 and INT8 models lose at most 0.16 percentage points. In simulation, 4-bit weights cost 1.45 points with MXFP4 and 0.72 points with NVFP4. When activations are quantized to 4 bits as well, MXFP4 loses 5.14 points and NVFP4 only 0.75, and NVFP4 comes out ahead in all five held-out-player folds. The ranking survives two alternative simulator settings, with NVFP4 leading by 3.49 to 4.40 points. A $2 \times 3$ ablation with 4-bit weights and activations (two block sizes and three scale rules) points to scale selection as the main source of MXFP4's loss. The reference MXFP4 conversion we simulate rounds the scale down, which can pick scales that are too small, so many blocks clip their largest values. Rounding the scale up recovers 3.18 points with 32-value blocks and 3.63 points with 16-value blocks, and switching to an 8-bit floating-point scale, as NVFP4 does, adds another 0.84 and 1.20 points. Block size matters less. Under this round-down rule, 16-value blocks score 0.44 points below 32-value blocks in all five folds; under the other two rules there is no consistent effect.
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 Machine Learning
ScaleTraj: Scale-Decomposed Human Trajectory Generation
Optimizing Recourse Under Predictive Multiplicity
When Strong Reasoners Join the Pool: Small Union Premiums and Costly Runaway Generations in LLM Routing
Timing is Everything: Inferring Temporal Membership in Continually Updated Models
ModelBlaster: Closing the Performance Gap through Learning-Augmented Agents Across Models, Kernels and Hardware Backends
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning 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.