[HN Gopher] Two sparsities are better than one: Performance of s...
___________________________________________________________________
Two sparsities are better than one: Performance of sparse-sparse
networks
Author : Anon84
Score : 42 points
Date : 2022-02-11 15:25 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arxiv.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org)
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Sparsity could really be a good thing but so many times I've
| tried to use it and walked away disappointed in terms of
| accuracy.
| Voloskaya wrote:
| It is already a good thing, but it currently requires a lot of
| engineering effort to actually get it to work with acceptable
| quality. It's not something that works out of the box like half
| precision, or for some models, int8. And to your point, for
| many production scenarios the ratio of engineering work vs
| performance gains is maybe not worth it. But for models that
| are going to handle massive load in inference it is worth it in
| my experience.
|
| I expect that this will be made much easier in future with
| better hardware support and smarter sparsification libraries.
| synthos wrote:
| It's the power savings that are the real goal. If you can
| create and (re)train a network for incredible sparsity you
| can fit inference in some pretty low power envelopes. I think
| to that end the work required to get to adequate perform is
| justified
| md2020 wrote:
| Always cool to see research from Numenta. They don't get as much
| love as DeepMind, Google Brain, and OpenAI because their results
| aren't as flashy, but I do feel like they've got a principled
| approach to engineering intelligent systems distinct from that of
| the big players.
| Chinjut wrote:
| An abundance of sparsities.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-02-11 23:01 UTC)