GenSynth: a generative synthesis approach to learning generative machines for generate efficient neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tremendous potential exhibited by deep learning is often offset by architectural and computational complexity, making widespread deployment a challenge for edge scenarios such as mobile and other consumer devices. To tackle this challenge, we explore the following idea: Can we learn generative machines to automatically generate deep neural networks with efficient network architectures? In this study, we introduce the idea of generative synthesis, which is premised on the intricate interplay between a generator‐inquisitor pair that work in tandem to garner insights and learn to generate highly efficient deep neural networks that best satisfies operational requirements. Experimental results for image classification, semantic segmentation, and object detection tasks illustrate the efficacy of generative synthesis (GenSynth) in producing generators that automatically generate highly efficient deep neural networks (which we nickname FermiNets with higher model efficiency and lower computational costs (reaching more efficient and fewer multiply‐accumulate operations than several tested state‐of‐the‐art networks), as well as higher energy efficiency (reaching improvements in image inferences per joule consumed on a Nvidia Tegra X2 mobile processor). As such, GenSynth can be a powerful, generalised approach for accelerating and improving the building of deep neural networks for on‐device edge scenarios.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".