Partitioning Convolutional Neural Networks to Maximize the Inference Rate on Constrained IoT Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Billions of devices will compose the IoT system in the next few years, generating a huge amount of data. We can use fog computing to process these data, considering that there is the possibility of overloading the network towards the cloud. In this context, deep learning can treat these data, but the memory requirements of deep neural networks may prevent them from executing on a single resource-constrained device. Furthermore, their computational requirements may yield an unfeasible execution time. In this work, we propose Deep Neural Networks Partitioning for Constrained IoT Devices, a new algorithm to partition neural networks for efficient distributed execution. Our algorithm can optimize the neural network inference rate or the number of communications among devices. Additionally, our algorithm accounts appropriately for the shared parameters and biases of Convolutional Neural Networks. We investigate the inference rate maximization for the LeNet model in constrained setups. We show that the partitionings offered by popular machine learning frameworks such as TensorFlow or by the general-purpose framework METIS may produce invalid partitionings for very constrained setups. The results show that our algorithm can partition LeNet for all the proposed setups, yielding up to 38% more inferences per second than METIS.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".