MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614053718 · doi:10.23919/date.2017.7927069

Energy efficient stochastic computing with Sobol sequences

2017· article· en· W2614053718 on OpenAlexaff
Siting Liu, Jie Han

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicError Correcting Code Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSobol sequenceStochastic computingSequence (biology)Pseudorandom binary sequenceComputer scienceShift registerPseudorandom number generatorEnergy (signal processing)AlgorithmEfficient energy useComputationBinary numberParallel computingMathematicsArithmeticMonte Carlo methodStatisticsEngineeringTelecommunicationsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Energy efficiency presents a significant challenge for stochastic computing (SC) due to the long random binary bit streams required for accurate computation. In this paper, a type of low discrepancy (LD) sequences, the Sobol sequence, is considered for energy-efficient implementations of SC circuits. The use of Sobol sequences improves the output accuracy of a stochastic circuit with a reduced sequence length compared to the use of another type of LD sequences, the Halton sequence, and conventional linear feedback shift register (LFSR)-generated pseudorandom sequence. The use of Sobol sequences leads to a similar or higher accuracy than using Halton sequences for basic arithmetic operations. Sobol sequence generators cost less energy than the Halton counterparts when multiple random sequences are required in a circuit, thus the use of Sobol sequences can lead to a higher energy efficiency in an SC circuit than using Halton sequences.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations115
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicError Correcting Code TechniquesFrench-language works237,207