INT4 Is Not One Treatment: Why the Quantisation-Safety Literature Cannot Be Reconciled as Reported, How Six Design Axes Separate Its Studies Before Bit-Width Does, and Why Two 2026 Studies of the Same Model Names Reach Opposite Verdicts

APA

Mahendrakar, P. (2026). INT4 Is Not One Treatment: Why the Quantisation-Safety Literature Cannot Be Reconciled as Reported, How Six Design Axes Separate Its Studies Before Bit-Width Does, and Why Two 2026 Studies of the Same Model Names Reach Opposite Verdicts [Journal article]. Life of Research. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23328132

Copy APA

BibTeX

@misc{lor1022026,
  title        = {INT4 Is Not One Treatment: Why the Quantisation-Safety Literature Cannot Be Reconciled as Reported, How Six Design Axes Separate Its Studies Before Bit-Width Does, and Why Two 2026 Studies of the Same Model Names Reach Opposite Verdicts},
  author       = {Pranay Mahendrakar},
  year         = {2026},
  publisher    = {Life of Research},
  doi          = {10.5281/zenodo.23328132},
  url          = {https://lifeofresearch.com/articles/102},
  keywords     = {post-training quantization, safety alignment, refusal, social bias, LLM-as-a-judge, evaluation methodology, model compression, confounding},
  note         = {LOR-00102}
}

Copy BibTeX More on the record page