MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953295373 · doi:10.1049/iet-cdt.2019.0115

Efficient spiking neural network training and inference with reduced precision memory and computing

2019· article· en· W2953295373 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Wang, Karim Shahbazi, Hao Zhang, Kwang‐Il Oh, Jae‐Jin Lee, Seok‐Bum Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Computers & Digital Techniques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFloating pointComputer scienceComputer hardwareMNIST databaseFixed-point arithmeticSpiking neural networkInteger (computer science)Memory footprintAlgorithmArtificial neural networkParallel computingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, reduced precision operations are investigated in order to improve the speed and energy efficiency of SNN implementation. Instead of using the 32‐bit single‐precision floating‐point format, small floating‐point format and fixed‐point format are used to represent SNN parameters and to perform SNN operations. The analyses are performed on the training and inference of a leaky integrate‐and‐fire model‐based SNN that is trained and used to classify the handwritten digits in MNIST database. The analysis results show that for SNN inference, the floating‐point format with 4‐bit exponent and 3‐bit mantissa or the fixed‐point format with 6‐bit integer and 7‐bit fraction can be used without any accuracy degradation. For training, a floating‐point format with 5‐bit exponent and 3‐bit mantissa or a fixed‐point format with 6‐bit integer and 10‐bit fraction can be used to obtain full accuracy. The proposed reduced precision formats can be used in SNN hardware accelerator design and the selection between floating‐point and fixed‐point can be determined by design requirements. A case study of SNN implementation on field‐programmable gate array device is performed. With reduced precision numerical formats, memory footprint, computing speed, and resource utilisation are improved. As a result, the energy efficiency of SNN implementation is also improved.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Computers & Digital TechniquesSame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207