Low-Precision Training in Logarithmic Number System using Multiplicative Weight Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training large-scale deep neural networks (DNNs) currently requires a significant amount of energy, leading to serious environmental impacts. One promising approach to reduce the energy costs is representing DNNs with low-precision numbers. While it is common to train DNNs with forward and backward propagation in low-precision, training directly over low-precision weights, without keeping a copy of weights in high-precision, still remains to be an unsolved problem. This is due to complex interactions between learning algorithms and low-precision number systems. To address this, we jointly design a low-precision training framework involving a logarithmic number system (LNS) and a multiplicative weight update training method, termed LNS-Madam. LNS has a high dynamic range even in a low-bitwidth setting, leading to high energy efficiency and making it relevant for on-board training in energy-constrained edge devices. We design LNS to have the flexibility of choosing different bases for weights and gradients, as they usually require different quantization gaps and dynamic ranges during training. By drawing the connection between LNS and multiplicative update, LNS-Madam ensures low quantization error during weight update, leading to a stable convergence even if the bitwidth is limited. Compared to using a fixed-point or floating-point number system and training with popular learning algorithms such as SGD and Adam, our joint design with LNS and LNS-Madam optimizer achieves better accuracy while requiring smaller bitwidth. Notably, with only 5-bit for gradients, the proposed training framework achieves accuracy comparable to full-precision state-of-the-art models such as ResNet-50 and BERT. After conducting energy estimations by analyzing the math datapath units during training, the results show that our design achieves over 60x energy reduction compared to FP32 on BERT models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".