Matched-bit-rate quality gap versus calibration-based methods

Establish the quality gap at matched total bit rates between TurboAngle and calibration-based KV cache quantizers by conducting controlled comparisons on identical evaluation models and datasets at equal bit budgets, thereby quantifying relative perplexity degradation under fair, apples-to-apples conditions.

Background

The comparative results in the paper draw from different models, datasets, and bit budgets across methods, so they do not constitute a controlled, fair comparison. The authors note that TurboAngle trades higher bit rates for lower degradation, but the exact gap at matched bit rates is not established.

A rigorous matched-bit-rate study would determine how TurboAngle stacks up against calibration-based approaches (e.g., KVQuant, CQ, AQUA-KV) when all methods are evaluated under identical conditions and equal total storage budgets.