Quantization-Triggered Backdoors in Language Models: Cross-Quantizer Transferability and the Validation--Deployment Gap
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Quantization-Triggered Backdoors in Language Models: Cross-Quantizer Transferability and the Validation--Deployment Gap
Abstract:Post-training quantization is often treated as a semantically neutral optimization for edge deployment of Large Language Models. When a full-precision source checkpoint is evaluated and quantization is applied downstream without equivalent re-evaluation, this workflow creates a structural validation--deployment gap: because quantization is a many-to-one mapping over parameter space, source-precision certification does not guarantee behavioral equivalence in the deployed configuration. We formalize this gap through Quantization Behavioral Equivalence Classes (QBECs) and prove that QBEC membership does not imply behavioral equivalence, providing a theoretical basis for quantization-triggered backdoor attacks. Building on a three-stage adversarial fine-tuning framework, we embed latent malicious payloads into models that satisfy the source-precision checks used in our evaluation, yet activate targeted adversarial behavior upon INT8 or 4-bit compression. We evaluate this threat in two operationally motivated scenarios, tactical machine translation and political content analysis, extending prior work from decoder-only causal LMs to multilingual encoder-decoder sequence-to-sequence models. Results show that backdoored translation models move from zero measured friend--foe corruption at repaired FP16 to up to 85.02% inversion after quantization, and that a paired stance classifier measures an ideological shift of up to $\Delta\mathrm{Bias}=0.33$ upon compression. A cross-quantizer transferability analysis further shows that attack persistence varies across quantization schemes and model architectures, rather than being determined by nominal bit-width alone. These findings demonstrate that source-precision auditing alone does not rule out quantization-triggered behavior and that the final deployed configuration must be included in behavioral certification for trustworthy edge AI.
| Comments: | Accepted at the 21st International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2026) |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Cryptography and Security (cs.CR) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.27512 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2608.27512v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.27512
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
Current browse context:
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
The Calls are Coming from Inside the Model: Investigating Probe-based Detection of Tool-Calling Errors in LLMs
Aug 31
-
Fast Weight Attention for Continual Learning
Aug 31
-
VISTA: Verifier-Informed Student-to-Teacher Adaptation for On-Policy Self-Distillation
Aug 31
-
Accelerating LLM Inference via Vector Index Based Output Embeddings
Aug 31
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.