DyVEDeep: Dynamic Variable Effort Deep Neural Networks
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have advanced the state-of-the-art on a variety of machine learning tasks and are deployed widely in many real-world products. However, the compute and data requirements demanded by large-scale DNNs remains a significant challenge. In this work, we address this challenge in the context of DNN inference. We propose Dynamic Variable Effort Deep Neural Networks (DyVEDeep), which exploit the heterogeneity in the characteristics of inputs to DNNs to improve their compute efficiency while maintaining the same classification accuracy. DyVEDeep equips DNNs with dynamic effort knobs, which in course of processing an input, identify how critical a group of computations are to classify the input. DyVEDeep dynamically focuses its compute effort only on the critical computations, while the skipping/approximating the rest. We propose 3 effort knobs that operate at different levels of granularity viz. neuron, feature and layer levels. We build DyVEDeep versions for 5 popular image recognition benchmarks on 3 image datasets---MNIST, CIFAR and ImageNet. Across all benchmarks, DyVEDeep achieves 2.1X-2.6X reduction in number of scalar operations, which translates to 1.9X-2.3X performance improvement over a Caffe-based sequential software implementation, for negligible loss in accuracy.
This work proposes a number of approximations for speeding up feed-forward network computations at inference time. Unlike much of the previous work in this area which tries to compress a large network, the authors propose algorithms that decide whether to approximate computations for each particular input example. Speeding up inference is an important problem and this work takes a novel approach. The presentation is exceptionally clear, the diagrams are very beautiful, the ideas are interesting, and the experiments are good. This is a high-quality paper. I especially enjoyed the description of the different methods proposed (SPET, SDSS, SFMA) to exploit patterns in the classifer. My main concern is that the significance of this work is limited because of the additional complexity and computational costs of using these approximations. In the experiments, the DyVEDeep approach was compared to serial implementations of four large classification models --- inference in these models is order of magnitudes faster on systems that support parallelization. I assume that DyVEDeep has little-to-no performance advantage on a system that allows parallelization, and so anyone looking to speed up their inference on a serial system would want to see a comparison between this approach and the model-compression approaches. Thus, I am not sure how much of an impact this approach can have in it*s current state. Suggestions: -I wondered what (if any) bounds could be made on the approximation errors of the proposed methods?
You are a member of the scientific community tasked with peer review. Review the following paper title and abstract.
### Title + Abstract
DyVEDeep: Dynamic Variable Effort Deep Neural Networks
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have advanced the state-of-the-art on a variety of machine learning tasks and are deployed widely in many real-world products. However, the compute and data requirements demanded by large-scale DNNs remains a significant challenge. In this work, we address this challenge in the context of DNN inference. We propose Dynamic Variable Effort Deep Neural Networks (DyVEDeep), which exploit the heterogeneity in the characteristics of inputs to DNNs to improve their compute efficiency while maintaining the same classification accuracy. DyVEDeep equips DNNs with dynamic effort knobs, which in course of processing an input, identify how critical a group of computations are to classify the input. DyVEDeep dynamically focuses its compute effort only on the critical computations, while the skipping/approximating the rest. We propose 3 effort knobs that operate at different levels of granularity viz. neuron, feature and layer levels. We build DyVEDeep versions for 5 popular image recognition benchmarks on 3 image datasets---MNIST, CIFAR and ImageNet. Across all benchmarks, DyVEDeep achieves 2.1X-2.6X reduction in number of scalar operations, which translates to 1.9X-2.3X performance improvement over a Caffe-based sequential software implementation, for negligible loss in accuracy.
user
<think>Okay, to do a decent peer review, I should start with summarizing what the work is about. This includes novelty, contributions, clarity, and impact. I might include suggestions to issues that I find critical to the usefulness of the work. Starting with novelty, there are different types of novelty. The first aspect of novelty is scope and scale. Is the work covering a broader perspective than previous works? The second aspect is methodology. Is the proposed methodology novel compared to previous methods? Do they provide any significant advantage over previous methodologies? The third aspect is results. Are the results different compared previous work? Does this lead to any novel theories or an extension of current theories? Next is clarity, I will be reading the work in depth and analyze if any sentences can be potentially ambiguous or misleading. If any sentences are ambiguous, I will state them and give a suggestion on how to rephrase such sentence or how to make more clear to the audience. Lastly, impact is important. I will attempt to predict how such work will impact the scientific community. This might include the applications of such work and how the work might transform the way we study a certain topic. Finally, I will might only mention issues that are critical. This is to keep the review as concise and helpful as possible.</think>



This work proposes a number of approximations for speeding up feed-forward network computations at inference time. Unlike much of the previous work in this area which tries to compress a large network, the authors propose algorithms that decide whether to approximate computations for each particular input example. Speeding up inference is an important problem and this work takes a novel approach. The presentation is exceptionally clear, the diagrams are very beautiful, the ideas are interesting, and the experiments are good. This is a high-quality paper. I especially enjoyed the description of the different methods proposed (SPET, SDSS, SFMA) to exploit patterns in the classifer. My main concern is that the significance of this work is limited because of the additional complexity and computational costs of using these approximations. In the experiments, the DyVEDeep approach was compared to serial implementations of four large classification models --- inference in these models is order of magnitudes faster on systems that support parallelization. I assume that DyVEDeep has little-to-no performance advantage on a system that allows parallelization, and so anyone looking to speed up their inference on a serial system would want to see a comparison between this approach and the model-compression approaches. Thus, I am not sure how much of an impact this approach can have in it*s current state. Suggestions: -I wondered what (if any) bounds could be made on the approximation errors of the proposed methods?
assistant
This work proposes a number of approximations for speeding up feed-forward network computations at inference time. Unlike much of the previous work in this area which tries to compress a large network, the authors propose algorithms that decide whether to approximate computations for each particular input example. Speeding up inference is an important problem and this work takes a novel approach. The presentation is exceptionally clear, the diagrams are very beautiful, the ideas are interesting, and the experiments are good. This is a high-quality paper. I especially enjoyed the description of the different methods proposed (SPET, SDSS, SFMA) to exploit patterns in the classifer. My main concern is that the significance of this work is limited because of the additional complexity and computational costs of using these approximations. In the experiments, the DyVEDeep approach was compared to serial implementations of four large classification models --- inference in these models is order of magnitudes faster on systems that support parallelization. I assume that DyVEDeep has little-to-no performance advantage on a system that allows parallelization, and so anyone looking to speed up their inference on a serial system would want to see a comparison between this approach and the model-compression approaches. Thus, I am not sure how much of an impact this approach can have in it*s current state. Suggestions: -I wondered what (if any) bounds could be made on the approximation errors of the proposed methods?