MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409288883 · doi:10.2172/2549315

wa-hls4ml and lui-gnn: A benchmark and GNN-based surrogate model for hls4ml resource and latency estimation

2025· article· en· W4409288883 on OpenAlexafffund
Benjamin Hawks, Dennis Plotnikov, Karla Tame-Narvaez, Hilal Rahali, Mohammad Mehdi Rahimifar, Audrey Corbeil Therrien, Giuseppe Di Guglielmo, Nhan Viet Tran, J. Duarte, Vladimir Lončar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFermilabU.S. Department of EnergyHigh Energy PhysicsOffice of ScienceCanada Research ChairsAdvanced Scientific Computing Research
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceLatency (audio)Surrogate modelResource (disambiguation)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer networkGeographyTelecommunicationsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As machine learning (ML) increasingly serves as a tool for addressing real-time challenges in scientific applications, the development of advanced tooling has significantly reduced the time required to iterate on various designs. These advancements have solved major obstacles, but also exposed new challenges. For example, processes that were not previously considered bottlenecks, such as model synthesis, are now becoming limiting factors in the rapid iteration of designs. To reduce these emerging constraints, multiple efforts are being launched toward designing an ML-based surrogate model that estimates resource usage of synthesized accelerator architectures. This model would reduce the design iteration time, especially when designing within a set of given hardware constraints. This approach shows considerable potential, but as it stands, the effort is early and would benefit from coordination and standardization to assist future work as it emerges. We introduce wa-hls4ml, a benchmark for ML accelerator resource and latency estimation, and its corresponding initial dataset of more than 100,000 fully connected neural networks, all synthesized using hls4ml and targeting Xilinx FPGAs. In addition to the resource utilization and latency data provided, the dataset includes generated artifacts and log files for many of the synthesized neural networks, in order to support future research in ML-based code generation. The benchmark evaluates the performance of resource and latency predictors against several common ML model architectures, primarily originating from scientific domains, as exemplar models, as well as the average performance across a subset of the dataset. We measure the performance of a given predictor model through multiple metrics, including $R^2$ score and SMAPE on regression tasks, as well as inference time to further characterize the estimator under test. Additionally, we introduce the latency/utilization inference graph neural network (lui-gnn), a surrogate model that uses a graph neural network to represent input architectures in the form of a directed graph. This graph representation allows for a diverse set of model architectures to all be effectively handled by a surrogate model. We present the architecture and performance of the model, as evaluated by the new proposed benchmark, including SMAPE, $R^2$ score, and inference times, and find that lui-gnn generally predicts latency and utilization for the 75\% quantile within several percent of the synthesized resources on the synthetic test dataset, indicating that this approach of estimating resource and latency via a surrogate models has promise and warrants further research.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207