Recent advances in large language model (LLM) pruning have shown state-of-the-art (SotA) compression results in post-training and retraining-free settings while maintaining high predictive performance. However, previous research mainly considered calibrating based on English text, despite the multilingual nature of modern LLMs and their frequent use in non-English languages. This analysis paper conducts an in-depth investigation of the performance and internal representation changes associated with pruning multilingual language models for monolingual applications. We present the first comprehensive empirical study, comparing different calibration languages for pruning multilingual models across diverse languages, tasks, models, and SotA pruning techniques. We further analyze the latent subspaces, pruning masks, and individual neurons within pruned models. Our results reveal that while calibration on the target language effectively retains perplexity and yields high signal-to-noise ratios, it does not consistently improve downstream task performance. Further analysis of internal representations at three different levels highlights broader limitations of current pruning approaches: While they effectively preserve dominant information like language-specific features, this is insufficient to counteract the loss of nuanced, language-agnostic features that are crucial for knowledge retention and reasoning.

Deploying language models on resource-constrained devices, such as mobile phones, wearables, and on-device AI assistants, demands compact, efficient models without sacrificing performance. Compressing Small Language Models (SLMs) is particularly suited for these scenarios, yet their compression dynamics remain underexplored compared to Large Language Models (LLMs). We systematically evaluate leading post-training pruning (SparseGPT, Wanda) and quantization (GPTQ, AWQ) methods across six SLMs from 0.5 to 3.8B, seven languages, and seven downstream tasks. Our results show that quantization consistently outperforms pruning in preserving model fidelity, multilingual perplexity, and reasoning accuracy. However, quantization’s advantages diminish on complex knowledge and reasoning tasks like OpenBookQA, highlighting a disconnect between compression fidelity and downstream task performance. Notably, trends observed in LLMs (e.g., Wanda’s competitive performance to SparseGPT) do not generalize to SLMs. For practitioners, we recommend prioritizing quantization (particularly AWQ) for SLM compression and caution against relying on a single metric.