Learning to Skip Ineffectual Recurrent Computations in LSTMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) is a special class of recurrent neural network, which has shown remarkable successes in processing sequential data. The typical architecture of an LSTM involves a set of states and gates: the states retain information over arbitrary time intervals and the gates regulate the flow of information. Due to the recursive nature of LSTMs, they are computationally intensive to deploy on edge devices with limited hardware resources. To reduce the computational complexity of LSTMs, we first introduce a method that learns to retain only the important information in the states by pruning redundant information. We then show that our method can prune over 90% of information in the states without incurring any accuracy degradation over a set of temporal tasks. This observation suggests that a large fraction of the recurrent computations are ineffectual and can be avoided to speed up the process during the inference as they involve noncontributory multiplications/accumulations with zero-valued states. Finally, we introduce a custom hardware accelerator that can perform the recurrent computations using both sparse and dense states. Experimental measurements show that performing the computations using the sparse states speeds up the process and improves energy efficiency by up to 5.2× when compared to implementation results of the accelerator performing the computations using dense states.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".