PreNeT: Leveraging Computational Features to Predict Deep Neural Network Training Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training deep learning models, particularly Transformer-based architectures such as Large Language Models (LLMs), demands substantial computational resources and extended training periods. While optimal configuration and infrastructure selection can significantly reduce associated costs, this optimization requires preliminary analysis tools. This paper introduces PreNeT, a novel predictive framework designed to address this optimization challenge. PreNeT facilitates training optimization by integrating comprehensive computational metrics, including layer-specific parameters, arithmetic operations and memory utilization. A key feature of PreNeT is its capacity to accurately predict training duration on previously unexamined hardware infrastructures, including novel accelerator architectures. This framework employs a sophisticated approach to capture and analyze the distinct characteristics of various neural network layers, thereby enhancing existing prediction methodologies. Through proactive implementation of PreNeT, researchers and practitioners can determine optimal configurations, parameter settings, and hardware specifications to maximize cost-efficiency and minimize training duration. Experimental results demonstrate that PreNeT achieves up to 72% improvement in prediction accuracy compared to contemporary state-of-the-art frameworks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".