MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100717332 · doi:10.1109/tnn.2010.2073481

High-Performance Reconfigurable Hardware Architecture for Restricted Boltzmann Machines

2010· article· en· W2100717332 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Le Ly, Paul Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arraySpeedupModular designExploitParallel computingVirtexEmbedded systemArtificial neural networkReconfigurable computingComputer architectureHardware accelerationHardware architectureComputer hardwareSoftwareOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the popularity and success of neural networks in research, the number of resulting commercial or industrial applications has been limited. A primary cause for this lack of adoption is that neural networks are usually implemented as software running on general-purpose processors. Hence, a hardware implementation that can exploit the inherent parallelism in neural networks is desired. This paper investigates how the restricted Boltzmann machine (RBM), which is a popular type of neural network, can be mapped to a high-performance hardware architecture on field-programmable gate array (FPGA) platforms. The proposed modular framework is designed to reduce the time complexity of the computations through heavily customized hardware engines. A method to partition large RBMs into smaller congruent components is also presented, allowing the distribution of one RBM across multiple FPGA resources. The framework is tested on a platform of four Xilinx Virtex II-Pro XC2VP70 FPGAs running at 100 MHz through a variety of different configurations. The maximum performance was obtained by instantiating an RBM of 256 × 256 nodes distributed across four FPGAs, which resulted in a computational speed of 3.13 billion connection-updates-per-second and a speedup of 145-fold over an optimized C program running on a 2.8-GHz Intel processor.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations60
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural NetworksSame topicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisFrench-language works237,207