MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DNN Memory Footprint Reduction via Post-Training Intra-Layer Multi-Precision Quantization

2024· article· en· W4396949517 on OpenAlexaff
Behnam Ghavami, Amin Kamjoo, Lesley Shannon, Steven J. E. Wilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemory footprintQuantization (signal processing)FootprintComputer scienceReduction (mathematics)Layer (electronics)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsGeologyMaterials scienceNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The imperative to deploy Deep Neural Network (DNN) models on resource-constrained edge devices, spurred by privacy concerns, has become increasingly apparent. To facilitate the transition from cloud to edge computing, this paper introduces a technique that effectively reduces the memory footprint of DNNs, accommodating the limitations of resource-constrained edge devices while preserving model accuracy. Our proposed technique, named Post-Training Intra-Layer Multi-Precision Quantization (PTILMPQ), employs a post-training quantization approach, eliminating the need for extensive training data. By estimating the importance of layers and channels within the network, the proposed method enables precise bit allocation throughout the quantization process. Experimental results demonstrate that PTILMPQ offers a promising solution for deploying DNNs on edge devices with restricted memory resources. For instance, in the case of ResNet50, it achieves an accuracy of 74.57% with a memory footprint of 9.5 MB, representing a 25.49% reduction compared to previous similar methods, with only a minor 1.08% decrease in accuracy.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207