AQLoRA: A Zero-Search Recipe for Fast Quantized LoRA Fine-Tuning
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:AQLoRA: A Zero-Search Recipe for Fast Quantized LoRA Fine-Tuning
Abstract:Quantized fine-tuning (QLoRA) saves memory but not time. It dequantizes every 4-bit weight on the fly, so it trains more slowly than fp16 LoRA. We present AQLoRA (Adaptive-Quantization LoRA), a recipe that buys part of that time back. One CPU pass over the weights sets everything, with no search and no calibration data. The pass ranks layers by NF4 reconstruction error and keeps the top-K in fp16 under a memory budget. Those layers skip dequantization, which is where the speed comes from. A quality setting adapts every layer. A speed setting adapts only the top blocks, so the backward pass stops early. The rule reproduces Unsloth's hand-curated dynamic-4bit selection exactly, in seconds, where search-based allocation needs repeated calibration passes.
We evaluate on Commonsense-170K across six models and four architecture families, from 1.4B to 14B. The speed setting trains 11.1 +/- 2.7% faster than well-tuned QLoRA and gives up about one accuracy point. It was faster in all nine independent timing sessions, at worst by 7%. The quality setting trains 4.8 +/- 2.4% faster. Its accuracy is level with QLoRA on every model and within a point of fp16 LoRA, for 0.2 GiB more memory. These error bars are measured between independent sessions, not within one. Earning them taught us three rules for timing on shared hardware. Fix the measurement duration, not the step count. Measure the noise floor from a duplicated arm, not a nearly identical method. Repeat whole sessions: a floor computed inside one sweep understates the real uncertainty several times over, and the random seed controls almost none of it.
We validate the recipe with controls and report the two that failed. Choosing adapter layers by weight density is no better than random. Choosing protected layers by quantization error is not either. The count of protected layers, not their identity, carries the speed effect.
| Comments: | 23 pages, 5 figures, 19 tables. Code and experimental artifacts: this https URL |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.23816 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2608.23816v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.23816
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
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 — Machine Learning
-
SLM-Conditioned Hierarchical Relation Routing for Labeled Property Graph Learning
Aug 28
-
NeuronFuzz: Safety Neuron Guided Fuzzing for LLM Safety Evaluation
Aug 28
-
Pruning Binarized Neural Networks: A Dedicated Framework and Globally Weighted Algorithms
Aug 28
-
Muon with Finite Newton-Schulz: The Smoothing Benefit in Nonsmooth Nonconvex Optimization
Aug 28
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.