MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004237976 · doi:10.1109/tetc.2020.2969435

Design Space Exploration of Stochastic Computing Architectures Implemented Using Integrated Optics

2020· article· en· W3004237976 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic computingComputer scienceLatency (audio)Efficient energy useDesign space explorationComputationNotationParallel computingComputational scienceSupercomputerImage processingMathematical notationComputer engineeringTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmEmbedded systemMathematicsArithmeticImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximate computing allows to trade-off design energy efficiency with computing accuracy. Stochastic computing is an approximate computing technique, where numbers are represented as bit streams corresponding to probabilities. The serial computation of the bit streams leads to reduced hardware complexity but involves high latency, which is the main limitation of the technique. Integrated optics technology relies on high propagation speed of signals, which has the potential to reduce the processing latency in stochastic computing. However, the design of stochastic computing architectures implemented using integrated optics involves the exploration of numerous parameters at system and technological levels. In this work, we propose a design space exploration framework that allows to optimize energy efficiency, computing accuracy, and latency of such architectures. The efficiency of the framework is evaluated using a Gamma correction image processing application. Results show that, for processing 160 x 160 pixels images, an acceptable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$ \times 4.5$</tex-math></inline-formula> increase in the errors leads to <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$ \times 47$</tex-math></inline-formula> energy efficiency and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$ \times 16$</tex-math></inline-formula> processing speed. We also show that the same computing accuracy can be obtained for different energy efficiency and computing latency, thus, validating the ability of the framework to explore the design space.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.227 · 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