MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406610261 · doi:10.1109/tetc.2025.3528972

Software-Defined Number Formats for High-Speed Belief Propagation

2025· article· en· W4406610261 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Amir Sabbagh Molahosseini, Junkyu Lee, Hans Vandierendonck

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftwareParallel computingTheoretical computer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the design and implementation of Software-Defined Floating-Point (SDF) number formats for high-speed implementation of the Belief Propagation (BP) algorithm. SDF formats are designed specifically to meet the numeric needs of the computation and are more compact representations of the data. They reduce memory footprint and memory bandwidth requirements without sacrificing accuracy, given that BP for loopy graphs inherently involves algorithmic errors. This article designs several SDF formats for sum-product BP applications by careful analysis of the computation. Our theoretical analysis leads to the design of 16-bit (half-precision) and 8-bit (mini-precision) widths. We moreover present highly efficient software implementation of the proposed SDF formats which is centered around conversion to hardware-supported single-precision arithmetic hardware. Our solution demonstrates negligible conversion overhead on commercially available CPUs. For Ising grids with sizes from 100 × 100 to 500 × 500, the 16- and 8-bit SDF formats along with our conversion module produce equivalent accuracy to double-precision floating-point format but with 2.86× speedups on average on an Intel Xeon processor. Particularly, increasing the grid size results in higher speed-up. For example, the proposed half-precision format with 3-bit exponent and 13-bit mantissa achieved the minimum and maximum speedups of 1.30× and 1.39× over single-precision, and 2.55× and 3.40× over double-precision, by increasing grid size from 100 × 100 to 500 × 500.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in ComputingSame topicNumerical Methods and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207