跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 08:12 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 08:32 — 2026-11-08 08:32(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-08 08:12最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 08:11(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.04185

What Does 4-Bit Microscaling Cost a Wearable Activity Recognizer?

Megan Healy, Hossein Valavi

原文摘要

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.

cs.LG