Spiking Neural Network Implementation on FPGA for Multiclass Classification
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
Spiking Neural Network (SNN) is a particular Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) form. An SNN has similar features as an ANN, but an SNN has a different information system that will allow SNN to have higher energy efficiency than an ANN. This paper presents the design and implementation of an SNN on FPGA. The model of the SNN is designed to be lower power consumption than existing SNN models in the aspect of FPGA implementation and lower accuracy loss than the existing training method in the part of the algorithm. The coding scheme of the SNN model proposed in this paper is the rate coding scheme. This paper introduces a conversion method to directly map the trained parameters from ANN to SNN with negligible classification accuracy loss. Also, this paper demonstrates the technique of FPGA implementation for Spiking Exponential Function, Spiking SoftMax Function and Dynamic Adder Tree. This paper also presents the Time Division Component Reuse technic for lower resource utilization in the FPGA implementation of SNN. The proposed model has a power efficiency of 8841.7 frames per watt with negligible accuracy loss. The benchmark SNN model has a power efficiency of 337.6 frames per watt with an accuracy loss of 1.42 percent. The reference accuracy of the ANN model is 90.36 percent. For comparison, the specific model of the SNN has an accuracy of 90.39 percent.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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