Bibliographic record
Abstract
While Strassen’s matrix multiplication algorithm reduces the complexity of naive matrix multiplication, general-purpose hardware is not suitable for achieving the algorithm’s promised theoretical speedups. This leaves the question of whether it could be better exploited in custom hardware architectures designed specifically for executing the algorithm. However, there is limited prior work on this and it is not immediately clear how to derive such architectures or whether they can ultimately lead to real improvements. We bridge this gap, presenting and evaluating new systolic array architectures that efficiently translate the theoretical complexity reductions of Strassen’s algorithm directly into hardware resource savings. Furthermore, the architectures are multisystolic array designs that can multiply smaller matrices with higher utilization than single-systolic array designs. The proposed designs implemented on FPGA reduce DSP requirements by a factor of$1.14^{r}$for r implemented Strassen recursion levels, and otherwise require overall similar soft logic resources when instantiated to support matrix sizes down to$32\times 32$and$24\times 24$at one to two levels of Strassen recursion, respectively. We evaluate the proposed designs in both isolation and an end-to-end machine learning accelerator compared with baseline designs and prior works, achieving state-of-the-art performance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.005 |
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".