MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning-Based Self-Compensating Approximate Computing

2020· preprint· en· W2999003874 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Masadeh, Osman Hasan, Sofiène Tahar

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Compensation (psychology)Process (computing)Energy (signal processing)Efficient energy useMultiplication (music)Power (physics)Range (aeronautics)Approximation errorComputer engineeringComputer hardwareAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dedicated hardware accelerators are suitable for parallel computational tasks. Moreover, they have the tendency to accept inexact results. These hardware accelerators are extensively used in image processing and computer vision applications, e.g., to process the dense 3-D maps required for self-driving cars. Such error-tolerant hardware accelerators can be designed approximately for reduced power consumption and/or processing time. However, since for some inputs the output errors may reach unacceptable levels, the main challenge is to enhance the accuracy of the results of approximate accelerators and keep the error magnitude within an allowed range. Towards this goal, in this paper, we propose a novel machine learning-based self-compensating approximate accelerators for energy efficient systems. The proposed error compensation module, which is integrated within the architecture of approximate hardware accelerators, efficiently reduces the accumulated error at its output. It utilizes lightweight supervised machine learning techniques, i.e., decision tree, to capture input dependency of the error. We consider image blending application in multiplication mode to demonstrate a practical application of self-compensating approximate computing. Simulation results show that the proposed design of self-compensating approximate accelerator can achieve about 9% accuracy enhancement, with negligible overhead in other performance measures, i.e., power, area, delay and energy.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2020 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon)Same topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207