MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401752634 · doi:10.1109/icdcs60910.2024.00017

When the Edge Meets Transformers: Distributed Inference with Transformer Models

2024· article· en· W4401752634 on OpenAlexaff
Chenghao Hu, Baochun Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformerInferenceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transformer models achieved significant break-throughs in a wide variety of applications, yet their exorbitant computation costs pose significant challenges when it comes to deploying these models for inference, especially on resource-constrained edge devices. In this paper, we introduce the concept of cross-device distributed inference to transformer models, which accelerates the speed of inference by distributing its workload among multiple edge devices. Unlike previous work designed for multi-GPU environments, the challenge of distributing inference workload on edge devices includes not only limited computation power, but also low bandwidth connections to exchange intermediate results. To address these challenges, we propose Voltage, a distributed inference system tailored for edge devices. By exploiting the inherent parallelizability of the input sequence, Voltage partitions the transformer inference workload based on positions to accelerate the inference speed. We also analyze the relationship between the partition settings and the computation complexity, which allows Voltage to adaptively select the most efficient computation scheme. To demonstrate its effectiveness and generalizability, the performance of Voltage has been evaluated in the context of well-known transformer models, and in a variety of experimental settings. Our results show that Voltage significantly outperforms tensor parallelism by reducing the communication size by 4 x, thereby accelerate the inference speed by up to 32.2 % compared with single device deployment.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207