MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309855231 · doi:10.3390/electronics11233883

A Study on the Design Procedure of Re-Configurable Convolutional Neural Network Engine for FPGA-Based Applications

2022· article· en· W4309855231 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pervesh Kumar, İmran Ali, Donggyun Kim, Sung-June Byun, Donggyu Kim, YoungGun Pu, Kang‐Yoon Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaSungkyunkwan University
KeywordsComputer scienceMNIST databaseVerilogField-programmable gate arrayConvolutional neural networkCompilerComputer architectureArtificial neural networkComputer engineeringGraphicsDeep learningComputer hardwareArtificial intelligenceEmbedded systemProgramming languageOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have become a primary approach in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), with wide range of applications. The two computational phases for every neural network are; the training phase and the testing phase. Usually, testing is performed on high-processing hardware engines, however, the training part is still a challenge for low-power devices. There are several neural accelerators; such as graphics processing units and field-programmable-gate-arrays (FPGAs). From the design perspective, an efficient hardware engine at the register-transfer level and efficient CNN modeling at the TensorFlow level are mandatory for any type of application. Hence, we propose a comprehensive, and step-by-step design procedure for a re-configurable CNN engine. We used TensorFlow and Keras libraries for modeling in Python, whereas the register-transfer-level part was performed using Verilog. The proposed idea was synthesized, placed, and routed for 180 nm complementary metal-oxide semiconductor technology using synopsis design compiler tools. The proposed design layout occupies an area of 3.16 × 3.16 mm2. A competitive accuracy of approximately 96% was achieved for the Modified National Institute of Standards and Technology (MNIST) and Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR-10) datasets.

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 score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207