arXiv subjects

Hyojung Han

Publications and source records attributed to Hyojung Han.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

When PTQ Calibration Helps or Hurts: Dose-Driven Collapse and Validation-Gated Abstention in Quantized Text Embedders

Learned post-training quantization (PTQ) calibration fits quantizer parameters on a small calibration set, and for a text embedder the natural supervision is retrieval relevance. We ask two questions that are usually conflated: how far to calibrate, and whether to calibrate at all. Across three embedders (e5-base-v2, BGE-M3, EmbeddingGemma-300m) at 4-bit weight quantization, 161 calibration runs, the outcome of a fixed procedure ranges from a gain to catastrophic degradation, and the driver is the dose of the update, measured as the functional displacement D_func of the quantized model from its uncalibrated start. On EmbeddingGemma the same learning-rate grid gives +1.47 to -71.53 points of in-domain NDCG@10 change; a label-free cosine objective collapses at the same dose (-69.52 vs -71.63), so the collapse is a property of learnable calibration rather than of retrieval supervision. Objective sensitivity is heterogeneous: on e5, ranking calibration is substantially more robust than cosine at matched displacement (+14.16 +/- 4.34 pp, 95% t-CI [+3.37, +24.96], three paired slates), whereas on BGE-M3 the ordering is directionally opposite but unresolved ([-5.18, +2.38]). Dose is the main axis but not a sufficient statistic: equal D_func reached along different paths differs by up to 1.61 pp. We therefore treat calibration as an optional intervention. A pre-registered rule that accepts a checkpoint only when a per-query paired confidence interval on a 25% calibration-validation split clears the uncalibrated baseline was run on 6 independent slates and five arms. It never selected a checkpoint below its slate's baseline (0 harmful selections in 30 decisions), retained 8 of 11 beneficial updates, and paid a mean oracle regret of 1.52 pp with one abstention that forfeited 11.13 pp, a safety-opportunity trade-off, not a free improvement. We report what remains open, including label efficiency.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Counterfactual Gate-Support Decomposition: Separating Selection from Redistribution in Training-Data Filtering

A training-data quality gate changes both which examples survive within regions of the input space and how training mass is distributed across those regions, so a gate-versus-random comparison does not isolate these mechanisms. We introduce Counterfactual Gate-Support Decomposition (CGSD), a four-arm, budget-matched design that crosses gate eligibility with support distribution and decomposes the observed gate effect into within-support selection, between-support redistribution, and their interaction. The practical constraint is finite-pool realizability: we characterize mass and token-assembly conditions under which the required arms can be constructed, together with a support-extinction case in which the ordinary design is undefined. On Korean-English and Korean-Japanese retrieval, the mean within-support selection component is the only one that exceeds its calibrated null band (+29.7 and +5.6 holdout items; 30/30 positive replicates), decisively in Korean-English and marginally in Korean-Japanese; redistribution and interaction remain unresolved at the available power. The same pattern holds for a second, unrelated gate family -- a model-confidence threshold rather than a deterministic verifier -- judged against its own null (+27.3 items, 9/9 positive), so the result is not a property of one gate's mechanism. On a mathematics gate, zero-eligibility supports leave the ordinary design undefined at every budget, while the extended design is constructible only inside narrow budget bands that an exhaustive scan locates and that the natural operating point misses -- the assembly condition separating a property of the pool from a limitation of the packer. CGSD therefore returns a decomposition, a constructible-but-underpowered design, or an explicit non-constructibility result, and says which; it prevents support redistribution from being silently interpreted as sample-level gate quality.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

When Should Enterprise Policy Decisions Be Learned, and When Should They Be Reasoned?

An enterprise agent that answers under a written policy must choose an action before it says anything: answer, ask for a missing fact, ask for confirmation, call one or several tools, escalate, or refuse. Holding one 27B Korean enterprise model fixed, we vary whether the decision is a generated JSON object or a single constrained token, and whether the model may reason first. On 2800 in-distribution items we did not detect an accuracy difference between the two deployed paths (93.46% vs 94.14%), while they differ about tenfold in restart stability (3.00% of actions flip vs 0.29%); they also differ in reasoning, so this is an operational comparison. On a sealed benchmark of 300 items whose labels come from a hidden executable policy, reasoning is worth +17.3 points [+12.3, +23.0] on exact action. With reasoning off, the format difference was 0.0 points [-4.3, +4.0], a failure to detect an advantage for either interface, not equivalence; with reasoning on it is unresolved. Against a token-matched random control, boundary-targeted supervision moves the two covered boundaries by +17.5 and +20.0 points and leaves a held-out boundary unchanged. In a 3-seed training x reasoning factorial, the sealed-rendering interaction is -4.9 [-8.1, -1.7], consistent with partial substitution. All supervision was Korean. On independently rendered English versions, the model is 0.82 points lower [-2.68, +0.93] with reasoning on, the same order as re-rendering in Korean; the reasoning-off gain from targeted supervision is not stable in either language, so we do not claim transfer. The original text stays private as the confirmatory set. An open-model re-rendering made after these results reproduced the reasoning effect and the English verdict; the interaction kept its sign but did not replicate under item-clustered intervals. We release the model and that re-rendering with gold labels.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Quantize by Drift: Label-Free Mixed-Precision Post-Training Quantization for Text Embedders

Mixed-precision post-training quantization needs a per-module sensitivity signal; for a text embedder the obvious one -- the retrieval quality a module costs when quantized -- needs relevance labels that deployments rarely have. We measure a label-free substitute: quantization-induced representation drift, obtained by quantizing one module, re-encoding the corpus, and recording how far the output embeddings moved from their full-precision positions. What is specific is the observable: the deployed output representation a dense retriever ranks with. Across five development embedders, configuration-level drift orders sampled mixed-precision plans against held-out retrieval quality at a macro Spearman of 0.911, the sensitivity transports across calibration corpora and retrieval domains in the usable regime, module drifts compose rank-consistently but not numerically, and relevance-derived sensitivity adds no consistent value. The method is one additive allocation under a hard packed-byte budget, with no labels and no search. On three embedders held untouched until method, baselines and hypotheses were frozen and sealed, the pre-registered directional hypothesis against the prior LieQ criterion holds (3/3 at the main budget, no collapse) and drift scores above a two-sided LieQ steelman in 2/3; but at the main budget drift is numerically lower than same-budget uniform precision on all three (-0.99, -0.85, -1.01 points), having reduced module and whole-model drift as designed. Output drift is thus a robust coarse sensitivity signal, not a universally optimal allocation objective: it avoids the catastrophic failures of the transferred signed-geometry adaptation and can remain usable at stressed budgets where uniform collapses, but fine-grained redistribution around a strong uniform operating point remains unresolved.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

On-Device Commercial Intent Retrieval Under Size, Latency, and Privacy Constraints: A 3 MiB Retrieval System with Typed Egress Boundaries

We study commercial intent inference that runs entirely on the user's device, under three constraints frozen before the work began: the downloaded payload under 3 MiB, Tier-0 inference under 20 ms at p95, and no raw text, content embedding, or stable identifier leaving the device. Under them we build a retrieval path over a 6,020-leaf commercial taxonomy: a static embedding table distilled from a Korean sentence transformer, quantized to 4 bits, no inference runtime. Our main result is where that constraint costs accuracy. On real Korean commerce text labelled by others (22,900 AI-Hub shopping reviews), mid-category top-5 on real product names is 75.0% against an 18.4% permutation baseline, but splits on one observable: a query containing some leaf name as a substring scores 83.5%, one containing none 45.2%. A generic 196.6x larger teacher seemed to localize the gap (+20.1 pp without an anchor, +0.1 with). That null was two effects cancelling: the same teacher fine-tuned on the student's own contrastive pairs reaches 0.8586 and beats the pure-encoder student by +10.6 pp with an anchor and +20.9 pp without. The cost is not uniform, but it is not free anywhere; where the anchor is absent, task adaptation buys the teacher nothing, so what the constrained encoder lacks there is capacity. The expensive regime is detectable on-device from the ranker's own score margin: declining the least confident fifth lifts the rest to 0.8296. A second axis we first reported, a manufacturer model code, does not survive source-category fixed effects (-4.0 pp, p=0.51); the anchor does (+13.0 pp). Payload is 2,942,652 bytes, all three library links measured. Tier-0 p95 is 4.431 and 3.670 ms on two iPhones (A14, A16) and 5.080 ms on a budget Android tablet (Snapdragon 695), all slower than three server CPUs on the same code. Taxonomy supervision is mostly synthetic Korean utterances.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Off-Target Effects of Response-Style Alignment in a Korean 27B Language Model

We post-train Qwen3.8-27B for Korean response style -- verbosity, list and markdown usage, discourse structure and register -- and measure two behaviours the objective never targets: abstention on ambiguous social questions in KoBBQ, where the benchmark-correct answer is UNKNOWN, and unprompted disclosure in securities guidance. Both move, and the changes are expressed primarily through the model's emission policy: how often it answers and how much it says. Matched target-form controls show that answer propensity depends on the training target, not the prompt set or recipe alone. Holding prompts, recipe, data volume and serving fixed and changing only the target text, three style seeds give positive answer-rate point estimates (mean +0.82 pp) and three neutral seeds negative ones (mean -1.53 pp); the observed seed ranges do not overlap and the means differ by 2.34 pp. A length-matched arm lies between them, and a fourth arm that stays short while preserving hedging is unstable across seeds, so which feature of the form is responsible is unresolved. For absolute stereotyped exposure the decomposition into an answer-propensity term and a conditional-composition term is an algebraic identity, not a finding; its empirical content is where the movement went. Across the trained checkpoints the changes are dominated by answer propensity while the composition term stays small, and because that term is evaluated on treatment-dependent answered subsets we do not read it as evidence about latent preference. Two measurement results follow. A between-arm contrast in conditional stereotyped share does not identify a change in conditional content preference when answer status is treatment-dependent. And agreement between two rule detectors for the same construct runs from 0.44 to 0.99 depending on which checkpoint produced the text -- observable without any reference labels.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Where Post-Training Quantization Breaks Text Embedders: A Measured Map Across Four Embedder Families

Weight-only post-training quantization is the cheapest way to shrink a retrieval embedder, and the received advice for applying it -- protect the embedding table, allocate bits by module sensitivity, prefer a ranking-aware objective over weight reconstruction -- was carried into LLM quantization largely intact. We test that advice on retrieval embedders directly, quantizing five checkpoints from four architecture families across a grid of bit widths and group sizes, and isolating the embedding, attention and feed-forward blocks at each width. Every heuristic fails to transfer as stated. The embedding table never emerges as the dominant isolated protection priority in any family, despite being the largest tensor in several of them. Module sensitivity does not survive as a transferable ordering: at INT4/g16 the spread between modules is too small to allocate against, at INT3 the ordering becomes family-dependent and joint damage stops being the sum of its parts, and at INT2 comparable reconstruction error accompanies retention ranging from 1.3 to 65.9 percent of full precision. A cheap reconstruction proxy is useful for screening uniform bit widths but substantially less reliable for choosing which tensors to protect; its apparent strength across the whole grid is a range-extension artifact. A distilled 109M student at INT3 holds 78.04 NDCG@10 in 68.4 MB and dominates the extreme-PTQ arm of its own 0.6B teacher, 297.9 MB at 64.46, on both size and quality -- but only inside the task it was distilled for. Sizes are byte counts of files that exist rather than arithmetic estimates, and the measurement repository carries the byte provenance for every one of them.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

Metric-Construction Coupling Inflates Measured Synthetic Dialect Recovery

Korean dialect corpora are available but not redistributable: weights may be released, while reproducing training and evaluation from the underlying data cannot be. We ask how much of that supervision synthetic data recovers, and whether that recovery can be measured independently of the synthesis pipeline. We contribute KoDialectBench, 1,000 items across five regions on three axes, released as identifier hashes and scoring code so users reconstruct the items from their own licensed copy. Recovery is strongly axis-dependent: our best synthetic arm reaches 91.2% of the real-data gain on region identification but 63.7% on comprehension. On generation the answer depends on the metric: the deployed marker lexicon reports 92.3% on dialectness and 119.3% on region match, the latter exceeding the real-data reference, whereas reference-based generation reaches 72.4%. We find the marker metrics' scoring inventory is entirely contained in the inventory our transformation rules can emit. We test the effect of construction access directly with an exact-form construction-disjoint arm that withholds 20% of marker types from the rules. At exactly matched training size (8,600 examples) it reduces dialectness recovery from 91.8% to 8.1% and region-match recovery from 101.9% to 25.6% on the held-out marker inventory, while the three pipeline-independent measurements do not fall at all. A complementary evaluator sweep defines metric-construction coverage (MCC) and finds measured dialectness recovery increasing monotonically as overlap rises from MCC=0 to MCC=1. Shared construction and evaluation inventories can therefore substantially inflate estimates of synthetic-data recovery.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Can you map it to English? The Role of Cross-Lingual Alignment in Multilingual Performance of LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) can answer prompts in many languages, despite being trained predominantly on English; yet, the mechanisms driving this generalization remain poorly understood. This work asks: How does an LLM's ability to align representations of non-English inputs to English impact its performance on natural language understanding (NLU) tasks? We study the role of representation alignment in instance-level task decisions, complementing prior analyses conducted both at the language level and task-independently. We introduce the Discriminative Alignment Index ($\DALI$) to quantify instance-level alignment across 24 languages other than English and three distinct NLU tasks. Results show that incorrect NLU predictions are strongly associated with lower representation alignment with English in the model's middle layers. Through activation patching, we show that incorrect predictions in languages other than English can be fixed by patching their parallel English activations in the middle layers, thereby demonstrating the causal role of representation (mis)alignment in cross-lingual correctness.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2021

Faster Re-translation Using Non-Autoregressive Model For Simultaneous Neural Machine Translation

Recently, simultaneous translation has gathered a lot of attention since it enables compelling applications such as subtitle translation for a live event or real-time video-call translation. Some of these translation applications allow editing of partial translation giving rise to re-translation approaches. The current re-translation approaches are based on autoregressive sequence generation models (ReTA), which generate tar-get tokens in the (partial) translation sequentially. The multiple re-translations with sequential generation inReTAmodelslead to an increased inference time gap between the incoming source input and the corresponding target output as the source input grows. Besides, due to the large number of inference operations involved, the ReTA models are not favorable for resource-constrained devices. In this work, we propose a faster re-translation system based on a non-autoregressive sequence generation model (FReTNA) to overcome the aforementioned limitations. We evaluate the proposed model on multiple translation tasks and our model reduces the inference times by several orders and achieves a competitive BLEUscore compared to the ReTA and streaming (Wait-k) models.The proposed model reduces the average computation time by a factor of 20 when compared to the ReTA model by incurring a small drop in the translation quality. It also outperforms the streaming-based Wait-k model both in terms of computation time (1.5 times lower) and translation quality.

cs.CL↗