Publication | Closed Access
7.7 LNPU: A 25.3TFLOPS/W Sparse Deep-Neural-Network Learning Processor with Fine-Grained Mixed Precision of FP8-FP16
154
Citations
5
References
2019
Year
Unknown Venue
Convolutional Neural NetworkEngineeringMachine LearningEnergy EfficiencyComputer ArchitectureSparse Neural NetworkSparse ModelingComputing SystemsEmbedded Machine LearningComputer EngineeringComputer ScienceDeep LearningNeural Architecture SearchDeep Neural NetworkEnergy-efficient Deep LearningFine-grained Mixed PrecisionHardware AccelerationEdge ComputingDomain-specific AcceleratorLocal Dnn
Deep‑neural‑network accelerators have been developed for energy‑efficient inference, but local on‑device learning with private data requires a new energy‑efficient processor due to limited compute and battery constraints. The proposed LNPU achieves on‑chip learning by exploiting sparsity and using FP8 precision, outperforming prior designs that used FP16 and ignored sparsity. Section 7.7.1.
Recently, deep neural network (DNN) hardware accelerators have been reported for energy-efficient deep learning (DL) acceleration [1–6]. Most prior DNN inference accelerators are trained in the cloud using public datasets; parameters are then downloaded to implement AI [1–5]. However, local DNN learning with domain-specific and private data is required meet various user preferences on edge or mobile devices. Since edge and mobile devices contain only limited computation capability with battery power, an energy-efficient DNN learning processor is necessary. Only [6] supported on-chip DNN learning, but it was not energy-efficient, as it did not utilize sparsity which represents 37%-61% of the inputs for various CNNs, such as VGG16, AlexNet and ResNet-18, as shown in Fig. 7.7.1. Although [3–5] utilized the sparsity, they only considered the inference phase with inter-channel accumulation in Fig. 7.7.1, and did not support intra-channel accumulation for the weight-gradient generation (WG) step of the learning phase. Also, [6] adopted FP16, but it was not energy optimal because FP8 is enough for many input operands with 4× less energy than FP16.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1