MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159854664 · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27774-8

An optical neural network using less than 1 photon per multiplication

2022· article· en· W3159854664 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tianyu Wang, Shi-Yuan Ma, Logan G. Wright, Tatsuhiro Onodera, Brian C. Richard, Peter L. McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsArtificial neural networkMultiplication (music)PhotonDeep learningComputer scienceOptical computingScalar multiplicationConvolutional neural networkScalar (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceElectronic engineeringOpticsPhysicsMathematicsEngineeringAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deep learning has become a widespread tool in both science and industry. However, continued progress is hampered by the rapid growth in energy costs of ever-larger deep neural networks. Optical neural networks provide a potential means to solve the energy-cost problem faced by deep learning. Here, we experimentally demonstrate an optical neural network based on optical dot products that achieves 99% accuracy on handwritten-digit classification using ~3.1 detected photons per weight multiplication and ~90% accuracy using ~0.66 photons (~2.5 × 10−19 J of optical energy) per weight multiplication. The fundamental principle enabling our sub-photon-per-multiplication demonstration—noise reduction from the accumulation of scalar multiplications in dot-product sums—is applicable to many different optical-neural-network architectures. Our work shows that optical neural networks can achieve accurate results using extremely low optical energies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations262
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207