Beside the point of this discussion, why do you believe smaller sensor formats will benefit more/first from this? As it's computing, surely it's file size (ie resolution) that matters to the speed, not the physical sensor size?
My limited understanding, based on what I’ve read in various on-line articles, is:
M43 bodies are similar in size to small FF bodies, which means that the IBIS unit can be made larger (therefore more efficient) in relation to the sensor size. Less movement between consecutive frames in a burst = more accurate merging of frames.
Smaller sensors have a smaller area of circuitry (other things being equal), which leads to faster data transfer, and (assuming the same processor power) faster data processing.
The (mechanical) shutter on M43 is smaller and lighter (than FF), therefore potentially faster in terms of the delay between each cycle of a burst. That results in potentially much faster fps - further reducing camera movement between consecutive frames.
In combination, the above mentioned factors provide the potential for faster bursts, less camera movement between frames, and faster data processing, which makes merges of consecutive frames potentially faster and more accurate than is possible with full frame. In conjunction with AI “computational photography” it will allow M43 to (amongst other things) offer very efficient focus stacking, noise reduction, stabilisation, and hand-held hi-res pixel shift (even with moving subjects).
The above, together with the much smaller and lighter M43 lenses (for a given angle of view and light-gathering power) are some of the reasons why I believe that M43 has a very bright future. The only fly in the ointment is that Canon, Nikon and Sony are not in the M43 alliance, and are unlikely to join it. So it’s very likely IMO that within 10 years the big brands will launch new, smaller mounts, to accommodate smaller sensors (1” anyone?).