Tensor Slices: FPGA Building Blocks For The Deep Learning Era
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
FPGAs are well-suited for accelerating deep learning (DL) applications owing to the rapidly changing algorithms, network architectures and computation requirements in this field. However, the generic building blocks available on traditional FPGAs limit the acceleration that can be achieved. Many modifications to FPGA architecture have been proposed and deployed including adding specialized artificial intelligence (AI) processing engines, adding support for smaller precision math like 8-bit fixed point and IEEE half-precision (fp16) in DSP slices, adding shadow multipliers in logic blocks, etc. In this paper, we describe replacing a portion of the FPGA’s programmable logic area with Tensor Slices. These slices have a systolic array of processing elements at their heart that support multiple tensor operations, multiple dynamically-selectable precisions and can be dynamically fractured into individual multipliers and MACs (multiply-and-accumulate). These slices have a local crossbar at the inputs that helps with easing the routing pressure caused by a large block on the FPGA. Adding these DL-specific coarse-grained hard blocks to FPGAs increases their compute density and makes them even better hardware accelerators for DL applications, while still keeping the vast majority of the real estate on the FPGA programmable at fine-grain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it