Tiny Machine Learning and On-Device Inference: A Survey of Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth in artificial intelligence and its applications has led to increased data processing and inference requirements. Traditional cloud-based inference solutions are often used but may prove inadequate for applications requiring near-instantaneous response times. This review examines Tiny Machine Learning, also known as TinyML, as an alternative to cloud-based inference. The review focuses on applications where transmission delays make traditional Internet of Things (IoT) approaches impractical, thus necessitating a solution that uses TinyML and on-device inference. This study, which follows the PRISMA guidelines, covers TinyML's use cases for real-world applications by analyzing experimental studies and synthesizing current research on the characteristics of TinyML experiments, such as machine learning techniques and the hardware used for experiments. This review identifies existing gaps in research as well as the means to address these gaps. The review findings suggest that TinyML has a strong record of real-world usability and offers advantages over cloud-based inference, particularly in environments with bandwidth constraints and use cases that require rapid response times. This review discusses the implications of TinyML's experimental performance for future research on TinyML applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
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".