Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Apollo: Transferable Architecture Exploration

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 2102.01723 v1 pith:S7FLAJWU submitted 2021-02-02 cs.LG cs.AR

Apollo: Transferable Architecture Exploration

classification cs.LG cs.AR
keywords designarchitectureconfigurationsacceleratoracceleratorsapolloarchitecturesconstraints
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The looming end of Moore's Law and ascending use of deep learning drives the design of custom accelerators that are optimized for specific neural architectures. Architecture exploration for such accelerators forms a challenging constrained optimization problem over a complex, high-dimensional, and structured input space with a costly to evaluate objective function. Existing approaches for accelerator design are sample-inefficient and do not transfer knowledge between related optimizations tasks with different design constraints, such as area and/or latency budget, or neural architecture configurations. In this work, we propose a transferable architecture exploration framework, dubbed Apollo, that leverages recent advances in black-box function optimization for sample-efficient accelerator design. We use this framework to optimize accelerator configurations of a diverse set of neural architectures with alternative design constraints. We show that our framework finds high reward design configurations (up to 24.6% speedup) more sample-efficiently than a baseline black-box optimization approach. We further show that by transferring knowledge between target architectures with different design constraints, Apollo is able to find optimal configurations faster and often with better objective value (up to 25% improvements). This encouraging outcome portrays a promising path forward to facilitate generating higher quality accelerators.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. ArchEval: Measuring AI Agents as Computer Architects

    cs.AR 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    LLM agents beat architecture baselines with full simulator harnesses, but only one configuration stays above baseline without feedback, and performance modeling remains weak.