Exploration of Activation Fault Reliability in Quantized Systolic Array-Based DNN Accelerators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stringent requirements for the Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) accelerator’s reliability stand along with the need for reducing the computational burden on the hardware platforms, i.e. reducing the energy consumption and execution time as well as increasing the efficiency of DNN accelerators. Moreover, the growing demand for specialized DNN accelerators with tailored requirements, particularly for safety-critical applications, necessitates a comprehensive design space exploration to enable the development of efficient and robust accelerators that meet those requirements. Therefore, the tradeoff between hardware performance, i.e. area and delay, and the reliability of the DNN accelerator implementation becomes critical and requires tools for analysis. This paper presents a comprehensive methodology for exploring and enabling a holistic assessment of the trilateral impact of quantization on model accuracy, activation fault reliability, and hardware efficiency. A fully automated framework is introduced that is capable of applying various quantization-aware techniques, fault injection, and hardware implementation, thus enabling the measurement of hardware parameters. Moreover, this paper proposes a novel lightweight protection technique integrated within the framework to ensure the dependable deployment of the final systolic-array-based FPGA implementation. The experiments on established benchmarks demonstrate the analysis flow and the profound implications of quantization on reliability, hardware performance, and network accuracy, particularly concerning the transient faults in the network’s activations.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".