Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Are SNNs Truly Energy-efficient? $-$ A Hardware Perspective

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

arxiv 2309.03388 v1 pith:6E7UAPYN submitted 2023-09-06 cs.NE

classification cs.NE
keywords hardwaresnnsalgorithmicenergy-efficiencyenergy-efficientlarge-scalerecentsata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs) have gained attention for their energy-efficient machine learning capabilities, utilizing bio-inspired activation functions and sparse binary spike-data representations. While recent SNN algorithmic advances achieve high accuracy on large-scale computer vision tasks, their energy-efficiency claims rely on certain impractical estimation metrics. This work studies two hardware benchmarking platforms for large-scale SNN inference, namely SATA and SpikeSim. SATA is a sparsity-aware systolic-array accelerator, while SpikeSim evaluates SNNs implemented on In-Memory Computing (IMC) based analog crossbars. Using these tools, we find that the actual energy-efficiency improvements of recent SNN algorithmic works differ significantly from their estimated values due to various hardware bottlenecks. We identify and address key roadblocks to efficient SNN deployment on hardware, including repeated computations & data movements over timesteps, neuronal module overhead, and vulnerability of SNNs towards crossbar non-idealities.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools