Modern LLM deployments routinely compress models and raise sampling temperature to reduce cost, latency, or repetition, yet safety evaluations usually treat these choices as fixed implementation details. This leaves a practical uncertainty: does a model that is safe at FP16 and greedy decoding remain safe after it is quantized and sampled stochastically, or do the two deployment knobs amplify one another?
arXiv:2606. 29581v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern LLM deployments routinely compress models and raise sampling temperature to reduce cost, latency, or repetition, yet safety evaluations usually treat these choices as fixed implementation details.
The paper challenges the assumption that large language models (LLMs) produce deterministic safety responses by examining how random seeds and temperature settings affect refusal decisions. Across four instruction‑tuned models and 876 harmful prompts, 18‑28% of prompts flipped between refusal and compliance depending on sampling configuration, with higher temperatures reducing decision stability. The authors introduce a Safety Stability Index (SSI) and recommend multi‑sample evaluation protocols that account for stochastic variation rather than relying on single‑shot tests.
arXiv:2606. 09864v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Key-value (KV) cache quantization is widely used to reduce Large Language Model (LLM) inference memory, yet existing evaluations solely focus on measuring perplexity and accuracy without assessing the safety impact.
arXiv:2606. 25097v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Speculative decoding accelerates inference by letting a draft model propose tokens for a target model to verify, raising a concrete safety question: at temperature zero, can draft-side behavior leak into safety-scored outputs?
The paper investigates where post‑training quantization (PTQ) harms large language models (LLMs) and how to best allocate a limited precision budget. By causally raising each layer to 8‑bit precision across nine open‑weight models, the authors find that quantization damage is diffuse rather than concentrated in specific task circuits or weight statistics, and that globally refining quantization granularity outperforms selectively protecting the most recoverable layers. They also observe that the residual accuracy loss is budget‑limited and that peak recovery locations correlate with architecture within families but not across families.
arXiv:2606. 26185v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-judge ("grader") components are now standard in evaluation harnesses, including safety evaluations where a pass/fail verdict may gate downstream deployment decisions.
arXiv:2608. 06564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Quantization is how large language models are actually deployed, and below four bits it is known to hurt.
arXiv:2607. 12792v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Jailbreak-robustness research typically evaluates safety through generated responses using an LLM-as-judge approach.
The study evaluates how quantization affects accuracy and safety of five 7‑8B language models on clinical benchmarks. INT8 GPTQ shows minimal degradation (≤1.9%) across tasks, while INT4 causes substantial, model‑dependent drops, especially in high‑risk scenarios and safety metrics. Recovery methods such as clinical calibration substitution and QLoRA fine‑tuning yield mixed results, underscoring the need for task‑specific validation.
arXiv:2607. 10855v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Quantization is a powerful strategy to build capable and resource-efficient large language models (LLMs) by reducing the bitwidth of the parameters.
arXiv:2608. 06564v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Quantization is how large language models are actually deployed, and below four bits it hurts.
arXiv:2608. 02665v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A benchmark score is a measurement instrument, yet most benchmarks read each item at a single canonical surface form.