Skip to content
Review

Large Models for Small Devices: Recent Advances and Empirical Analysis of Edge AI Deployment

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 66 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work surveys dozens of recent works that report compression results on real hardware and extracts practical deployment guidelines from them, and deploys compact language and image models on GPU, CPU, and Raspberry Pi platforms across question answering and image segmentation.

Abstract

Running large AI models on resource-constrained edge devices requires model compression to reduce model size and computation. What compresses well, however, need not deploy well. We survey dozens of recent works that report compression results on real hardware and extract practical deployment guidelines from them. Following these guidelines, we deploy compact language and image models on GPU, CPU, and Raspberry Pi platforms across question answering and image segmentation. No single technique wins across tasks. For question answering, Qwen3.5 0.8B reaches 93.85 SQuAD F1 and 92 EM under Q5_K_M GGUF quantization, while structured pruning at the same precision costs 16 F1 at a 1% ratio. For segmentation, the ranking reverses: default quantization leaves parameters and MACs unchanged, whereas pruning cuts model size by nearly 80% at near-constant mIoU. Pruning can even inflate the deployed artifact by 21-49% by breaking k-quant super-block alignment; combined with longer, less format-compliant outputs, this raises Raspberry Pi latency up to 3.4x. Compression can also manufacture the appearance of competence rather than destroy it visibly: one LoRA-recovered variant stays fully parseable and holds 71% strict BoolQ accuracy while sending 97 of 100 predictions to a single class, at 52.6% balanced accuracy. We explain these effects through neural-flow graph analysis and prefill-decode-level latency decomposition, and condense them into task-specific deployment research directions. The right technique depends on the task, the model, and the hardware. Our experiment code and artifacts are open-sourced at https://github.com/Arnavvvkumar/deployment

View source

Similar papers

Open access Jul 2026

Design of Resource-Efficient AI Models through Parameter Reduction and Accuracy-Aware Compression

The proposed hybrid pipeline includes structured pruning, INT8 quantization and task-specific knowledge distillation, which is benchmarked against standalone methods and reinforces the idea of upper bound projection based approach for accuracy-oriented, multi-level compression.

Krishna Kumar Tiwari, Komal Tahiliani, Uma Shankar Birthare et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Opt.Gear Technical Report

OptGear-1M is the first generative language model to achieve 20 TPS with W4A32 quantization on the ARM Cortex-M7 CPU of the STM32H747I-DISCO, and is the most data-efficient of the existing foundation models.

Juneyoung Park, Youngwoo Kwon · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

Evaluating large language model compression: a comparative analysis on state-of-the-art models across diverse hardware platforms

Quantization, pruning, and parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods enabled models to match or outperform models with up to 18 times the parameters on SQuAD v2 while reducing storage as well as optimizer overhead and often improved task performance even when full fine-tuning failed.

Dominik Hildebrand, Benjamin Kiefer, Andreas Zell · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

When Does Distributed AI Inference Need More Wide-Area Bandwidth? A Co-Design Evaluation of Optical, Packet, and Software Levers

A workload model predicting when moving inference state across sites beats recomputing it is derived, and five sensitivity axes are quantify: context length, attention architecture, queueing, agentic compounding, and loss/jitter-induced bandwidth collapse are quantified.

C. Prasanna · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Benchmarking Composable Compression Techniques in Mixture-of-Experts LLMs

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLMs scale model capacity efficiently through sparse activation, but their large expert parameter footprint, routing imbalance, and long-context KV-cache growth make deployment difficult on commodity hardware. Practical deployment often requires stacking multiple compression techniques: expert pruning removes redundant experts, weight quantization lowers model memory footprint, and KV-cache compression reduces long-context memory pressure. However, these techniques are typically evaluated in isolation, leaving open how they interact when applied together in realistic deployment pipelines. In this work, we present MoEXBench, a systematic benchmark for evaluating composable MoE compression as an end-to-end deployment workflow. MoEXBench studies 10 MoE models ranging from 30B to 235B total parameters across standard-attention, hybrid linear-attention, and sliding window attention architectures. It evaluates 20%-50% expert pruning rates, 1 to 16 bit weight-quantization schemes, and multiple KV-cache precision settings, applied both individually and in combination. MoEXBench introduces an eight-module evaluation suite that jointly measures composable-compression quality, workload and architecture robustness, pruning/quantization/KV cache sensitivity, and deployment efficiency on commodity hardware. Our results reveal non-trivial interactions among compression methods: composable compression cannot be predicted from standalone techniques, compression rate alone does not reliably predict quality loss or runtime gain, expert pruning is the dominant degradation source, and average quality can hide workload and architecture-specific failures. By releasing normalized module scores, compressed artifacts, and reproducible scripts, MoEXBench enables practical accuracy-memory-latency comparison across MoE families and hardware backends.

A. Benazir, Chen Chen, Rongxiao Qu et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.