MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981364124 · doi:10.1109/reconfig.2011.79

Resource Efficient Arithmetic Effects on RBM Neural Network Solution Quality Using MNIST

2011· article· en· W1981364124 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMNIST databaseComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayArtificial neural networkDigital signal processingFloating pointComputer engineeringParallel computingDeep learningComputer hardwareAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a case study on the impact of using reduced precision arithmetic on learning in Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) deep belief networks. FPGAs provide a hardware accelerator framework to speed up many algorithms, including the learning and recognition tasks of ever growing neural network topologies and problem complexities. Current FPGAs include DSP blocks - hard blocks that allow designers to roll in hardware otherwise built using significant quantity of reconfigurable logic (slices) and increase clock performance of arithmetic operations. Accelerators on FPGAs can take advantage of, in some products, thousands DSP blocks on a single chip to scale up the parallelism of designs. Conversely, IEEE floating point representation cannot be fully implemented in single DSP slices and requires a significant amount of general logic thus reducing the amount of resources available to breadth of parallelism in an accelerator design. Reduced precision fixed point format arithmetic can fit within a single DSP slice without external logic. It has been used successfully for training MLP-BP neural networks on small problems. The merit of reduced precision computation in RBM networks for sizable problems has not been evaluated. In this work, a three layer RBM network linked to one classification layer (1.6M weights) is used to learn the classic MNIST dataset over a set of common limited precisions used in FPGA designs. Issues of parameter saturation and a method to overcome inherent training difficulties is discussed. The results demonstrate that RBM can be trained successfully using resource-efficient fixed point formats commonly found in current FPGA devices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it