MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767260595 · doi:10.1145/3126908.3126964

Understanding error propagation in deep learning neural network (DNN) accelerators and applications

2017· article· en· W2767260595 on OpenAlexaff
Guanpeng Li, Siva Kumar Sastry Hari, Michael B. Sullivan, Timothy Tsai, Karthik Pattabiraman, Joel Emer, Stephen W. Keckler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRedundancy (engineering)Triple modular redundancyModular designArtificial neural networkDeep learningResilience (materials science)Deep neural networksSoftwareComputer architectureEfficient energy useComputer engineeringEmbedded systemArtificial intelligenceDistributed computingMachine learningOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning neural networks (DNNs) have been successful in solving a wide range of machine learning problems. Specialized hardware accelerators have been proposed to accelerate the execution of DNN algorithms for high-performance and energy efficiency. Recently, they have been deployed in datacenters (potentially for business-critical or industrial applications) and safety-critical systems such as self-driving cars. Soft errors caused by high-energy particles have been increasing in hardware systems, and these can lead to catastrophic failures in DNN systems. Traditional methods for building resilient systems, e.g., Triple Modular Redundancy (TMR), are agnostic of the DNN algorithm and the DNN accelerator's architecture. Hence, these traditional resilience approaches incur high overheads, which makes them challenging to deploy. In this paper, we experimentally evaluate the resilience characteristics of DNN systems (i.e., DNN software running on specialized accelerators). We find that the error resilience of a DNN system depends on the data types, values, data reuses, and types of layers in the design. Based on our observations, we propose two efficient protection techniques for DNN systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
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

Citations483
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207