REVIEW 2 cited by
Mixed Precision DNNs: All you need is a good parametrization
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Efficient deep neural network (DNN) inference on mobile or embedded devices typically involves quantization of the network parameters and activations. In particular, mixed precision networks achieve better performance than networks with homogeneous bitwidth for the same size constraint. Since choosing the optimal bitwidths is not straight forward, training methods, which can learn them, are desirable. Differentiable quantization with straight-through gradients allows to learn the quantizer's parameters using gradient methods. We show that a suited parametrization of the quantizer is the key to achieve a stable training and a good final performance. Specifically, we propose to parametrize the quantizer with the step size and dynamic range. The bitwidth can then be inferred from them. Other parametrizations, which explicitly use the bitwidth, consistently perform worse. We confirm our findings with experiments on CIFAR-10 and ImageNet and we obtain mixed precision DNNs with learned quantization parameters, achieving state-of-the-art performance.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
APQF: Agentic Profiling-Guided Structured Pruning and Mixed-Precision Quantization with Adaptive Fine-Tuning
A profiling-guided, LLM-driven framework combines structured pruning and mixed-precision quantization-aware training, reporting 13-18x bit-operation reductions with modest accuracy loss on ImageNet and CIFAR-10.
-
Harnessing Input-Adaptive Inference for Efficient VLN
A three-part input-adaptive inference method (view masking, adaptive early exit, view caching) cuts VLN computation roughly in half on seven benchmarks with moderate success-rate loss.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.