MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heterogeneous Distributed SRAM Configuration for Energy-Efficient Deep CNN Accelerators

2020· article· en· W3047759693 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Ahmadi, Shervin Vakili, J. M. Pierre Langlois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramStatic random-access memoryComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkEfficient energy useUniversal memoryChipComputer hardwareProcess (computing)Embedded systemEnergy (signal processing)ComputationParallel computingMemory managementSemiconductor memoryArtificial intelligenceInterleaved memoryEngineeringElectrical engineeringAlgorithmOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are often the first choice for visual recognition systems due to their high, even superhuman, recognition accuracy. The memory configuration of CNN accelerators highly impacts their area and energy efficiency, and employing on-chip memories such as SRAMs is unavoidable. SRAMs can reduce the number of energy-hungry DRAM accesses by storing a large amount of data locally. In this paper, we propose a new on-chip memory configuration, for a certain class of CNN accelerators that divides the memories into two groups. The first group consists of shallow but wide SRAMs into which parallel computational units accumulate intermediate results. The second group includes narrow but deep SRAMs shared between adjacent computational units to store then transfer final results to the external DRAM without interrupting the computation process. Implementation results show that the proposed configuration reduces the area by 21 % and improves the energy efficiency by 18% compared to designs which use an ordinary ping-pong structure for SRAM-DRAM data transfer.

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 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 categoriesnone
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 score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.256
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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207