mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Safety-Preserving PTQ via Contrastive Alignment Loss

arXiv 2511.07842 ↗First posted 11 Nov 2025cs.AIcited by 3

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

Post-Training Quantization (PTQ) has become the de-facto standard for efficient LLM deployment, yet its optimization objective remains fundamentally incomplete. Standard PTQ methods minimize reconstruction error (e.g., MSE or KL divergence) without accounting for behavioral alignment--a critical property instilled through safety fine-tuning. We demonstrate that this objective mismatch introduces a systematic vulnerability: models can maintain low perplexity yet exhibit significant degradation in safety alignment, revealing that perplexity alone is an insufficient and often misleading proxy for deployment readiness. To address this, we propose Contrastive Alignment Quantization (CAQ), which extends the PTQ objective design space by integrating a Contrastive Alignment Loss (CAL). CAL introduces a principled push-pull mechanism that jointly optimizes distributional fidelity and behavioral alignment: it steers the quantized model toward its safe, instruction-tuned counterpart while diverging from the unaligned, pre-trained reference. CAQ requires no specialized safety datasets, relying solely on standard calibration data, and introduces negligible computational overhead over existing transformation-based PTQ pipelines. We show that CAQ enables robust 4-bit (W4A4) quantization across diverse model families--including LLaMA, Qwen, and Mistral--achieving superior safety alignment where state-of-the-art PTQ methods fail, without sacrificing general capabilities. Anonymized code is available in the supplementary material.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 19 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Nov 2025.

Builds on

19 of 32 references.

References · 19

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  4. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,886
  5. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
  6. 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
  7. 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,883
  8. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
  9. 2019BoolQ: Exploring the Surprising Difficulty of Natural Yes/No Questionscited by 2,183
  10. 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,164
  11. 2022GPTQ: Accurate Post-Training Quantization for Generative Pre-trained Transformerscited by 1,919
  12. 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,822
7 more
  1. 2016The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse contextcited by 992
  2. 2024QuaRot: Outlier-Free 4-Bit Inference in Rotated LLMscited by 634
  3. 2024SpinQuant: LLM quantization with learned rotationscited by 471
  4. 2024DuQuant: Distributing Outliers via Dual Transformation Makes Stronger Quantized LLMscited by 167
  5. 2024FlatQuant: Flatness Matters for LLM Quantizationcited by 131
  6. 2025OstQuant: Refining Large Language Model Quantization with Orthogonal and Scaling Transformations for Better Distribution Fittingcited by 97
  7. 2025Investigating the Impact of Quantization Methods on the Safety and Reliability of Large Language Modelscited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Q-realign: Piggybacking Realignment on Quantization for Safe and Efficient LLM Deployment
  2. 2026The Joint Effect of Quantization and Sampling Temperature on LLM Safety Alignment: A Factorial Analysis
  3. 2026Beyond Activation Alignment:The Alignment-Diversity Tradeoff in Task-Aware LLM Quantization
  4. 2026Aligned but Fragile: Enhancing LLM Safety Robustness via Zeroth-Order Optimization
  5. 2026From Signal Degradation to Computation Collapse: Uncovering the Two Failure Modes of LLM Quantization
  6. 2026The Devil Is in the Reconstruction Loss Scale: Rethinking Optimization in LLM Quantization
  7. 2026Safeguarding LLM Fine-tuning via Push-Pull Distributional Alignment
  8. 2026Safety at One Shot: Patching Fine-Tuned LLMs with A Single Instance