Cited by 26Embedded Systems Design TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Towards efficient deep neural network training by FPGA-based batch-level parallelism

Open access

Abstract

Abstract Training deep neural networks (DNNs) requires a significant amount of time and resources to obtain acceptable results, which severely limits its deployment in resource-limited platforms. This paper proposes DarkFPGA, a novel customizable framework to efficiently accelerate the entire DNN training on a single FPGA platform. First, we explore batch-level parallelism to enable efficient FPGA-based DNN training. Second, we devise a novel hardware architecture optimised by a batch-oriented data pattern and tiling techniques to effectively exploit parallelism. Moreover, an analytical model is developed to determine the optimal design parameters for the DarkFPGA accelerator with respect to a specific network specification and FPGA resource constraints. Our results show that the accelerator is able to perform about 10 times faster than CPU training and about a third of the energy consumption than GPU training using 8-bit integers for training VGG-like networks on the CIFAR dataset for the Maxeler MAX5 platform.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/1674-4926/41/2/022403

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Krishnan, 2017, Accelerator templates and runtime support for variable precision CNN, CISC Workshop

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 26

Metadata

Authors
Luo, C., Sit, M.-K., Fan, H., Liu, S., Luk, W., & Guo, C.
Affiliations
  • Fudan University (CN)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
Journal of Semiconductors
Published
2020-02-01
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
022403
ISSN
  • 1674-4926 (ISSN-L)
  • 2058-6140
OpenAlex
W3004303566
Cited by
26
References
6
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Semiconductors (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Embedded Systems Design Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Keywords
FPGA, deep neural network training, hardware accelerators, tiling, energy efficiency, VGG, resource-constrained platforms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review