MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023146441 · doi:10.1109/tc.2020.2992113

An Improved Logarithmic Multiplier for Energy-Efficient Neural Computing

2020· article· en· W3023146441 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Saeed Ansari, B.F. Cockburn, Jie Han

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdderComputer scienceMultiplier (economics)LogarithmBenchmark (surveying)ArithmeticEnergy consumptionMultiplication (music)Artificial neural networkApproximation errorAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiplication is the most resource-hungry operation in neural networks (NNs). Logarithmic multipliers (LMs) simplify multiplication to shift and addition operations and thus reduce the energy consumption. Since implementing the logarithm in a compact circuit often introduces approximation, some accuracy loss is inevitable in LMs. However, this inaccuracy accords with the inherent error tolerance of NNs and their associated applications. This article proposes an improved logarithmic multiplier (ILM) that, unlike existing designs, rounds both inputs to their nearest powers of two by using a proposed nearest-one detector (NOD) circuit. Considering that the output of the NOD uses a one-hot representation, some entries in the truth table of a conventional adder cannot occur. Hence, a compact adder is designed for the reduced truth table. The 8x8 ILM achieves up to 17.48 percent saving in power consumption compared to a recent LM in the literature while being almost 8 percent more accurate. Moreover, the evaluation of the ILM for two benchmark NN workloads shows up to 21.85 percent reduction in energy consumption compared to the NNs implemented with other LMs. Interestingly, using the ILM increases the classification accuracy of the considered NNs by up to 1.4 percent compared to a NN implementation that uses exact multipliers.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations111
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ComputersSame topicFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance DevicesFrench-language works237,207