MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward Large Scale All-Optical Spiking Neural Networks

2022· article· en· W4308659928 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Eslaminia, Sébastien Le Beux

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSynaptic weightNeuromorphic engineeringSpiking neural networkArtificial neural networkMultiplexingEnergy consumptionBenchmark (surveying)PruningWavelength-division multiplexingComputer hardwareComputer architectureArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsWavelengthElectrical engineeringEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon Photonics is a promising technology to develop neuromorphic hardware accelerators. Most optical neural networks rely on wavelength division multiplexing (WDM), which calls for power hungry calibration to compensate for non-uniformity fabrication process and thermal variations of microring resonators (MRR). This imposes practical limits on neuromorphic photonic hardware since only a small number of synaptic connections per neuron can be implemented. As a result, the mapping of neural networks (NN) on a hardware platform require pruning of synaptic connections, which drastically affects the accuracy. In this work, we propose a method to efficiently map pre-trained NN on an all-optical spiking neural network (SNN), with the aim to optimize hardware utilization while minimizing accuracy loss. The method relies on weight partitioning and unrolling to reduce synaptic connections. The resulting neural networks are mapped on an architecture we propose, allowing to estimate accuracy and power consumption. Results show the capability of weight partitioning to implement a realistic NN while attaining 58% reduction in energy consumption compared with unrolling.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207