Cited by 236Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques

Sparsification and Separation of Deep Learning Layers for Constrained Resource Inference on Wearables

Open access
Bhattacharya, Sourav, Lane, Nicholas D.·2016·Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems CD-ROM

Abstract

Deep learning has revolutionized the way sensor data are analyzed and interpreted. The accuracy gains these approaches offer make them attractive for the next generation of mobile, wearable and embedded sensory applications. However, state-of-the-art deep learning algorithms typically require a significant amount of device and processor resources, even just for the inference stages that are used to discriminate high-level classes from low-level data. The limited availability of memory, computation, and energy on mobile and embedded platforms thus pose a significant challenge to the adoption of these powerful learning techniques. In this paper, we propose SparseSep, a new approach that leverages the sparsification of fully connected layers and separation of convolutional kernels to reduce the resource requirements of popular deep learning algorithms. As a result, SparseSep allows large-scale DNNs and CNNs to run efficiently on mobile and embedded hardware with only minimal impact on inference accuracy. We experiment using SparseSep across a variety of common processors such as the Qualcomm Snapdragon 400, ARM Cortex M0 and M3, and Nvidia Tegra K1, and show that it allows inference for various deep models to execute more efficiently; for example, on average requiring 11.3 times less memory and running 13.3 times faster on these representative platforms.

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 · 10.1145/2994551.2994564

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • On the Opportunity dataset, InnoHAR improves F1-score by about 9% over CNN and by 3% over DeepConvLSTM.

    “For Opportunit dataset, our proposed model has a signi cant increase of about 9% compared with the CNN model of Yang et al. [25], as well as a 3% improvement compared with DeepConvLSTM.”
  • InnoHAR outperforms both CNN and DeepConvLSTM on the Opportunity, PAMAP2, and Smartphone datasets.

    “In terms of overall performance, the experimental results show that our proposed InnoHAR model based on Inception-like module has better performance than both CNN [25] and DeepConvLSTM [19].”
  • Most existing deep learning studies for HAR have used deep learning as a black box and scratched the data.

    “Most of these existing research have only used deep learning as a black box, and the data has been scratched. For example, Ronao and Cho [22] and Yang et al. [25] perform feature extraction of the sliding window using only shallow convolutional neural networks.”
  • CNN achieves an F1-score of 0.851 on the Opportunity dataset, 0.88 on the PAMAP2 dataset, and 0.915 on the Smartphone dataset.

    “| CNN [25] | 0.851 | 0.88 | 0.915 |”
  • On the PAMAP2 dataset, InnoHAR improves F1-score by nearly 5% over CNN and by 3% over DeepConvLSTM.

    “For PAMAP2 dataset, we can also observe nearly a 5% gap between the best (proposed model) and worst (CNN [25]), and InnoHAR also has a 3% performance advantage over DeepConvLSTM.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Y. Bengio, I. J. Goodfellow, and A. Courville, "Deep learning," 2015, book in preparation for MIT Press. [Online]. Available: http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/˜bengioy/dlbook
  2. C. M. Bishop, Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, 2007.
  3. T. H. Cormen, C. E. Leiserson, R. L. Rivest, and C. Stein, Introduction to algorithms, 3rd ed. MIT press, 2009.
  4. H. Lee, A. Battle, R. Raina, and A. Y. Ng, "E cient sparse coding algorithms," in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2007.
  5. M.-R. Ra, A. Sheth, L. B. Mummert, P. Pillai, D. Wetherall, and R. Govindan, "Odessa: enabling interactive perception applications on mobile devices." in MobiSys, A. K. Agrawala, M. D. Corner, and D. Wetherall, Eds. ACM, 2011, pp. 43-56. [Online]. Available: http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/conf/mobisys/ mobisys2011.html#RaSMPWG11
  6. J. Xue, J. Li, and Y. Gong, "Restructuring of deep neural network acoustic models with singular value decomposition," in Interspeech, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/ default.aspx?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bhattacharya, S., & Lane, N. D.
Affiliations
  • Nokia Bell Labs
  • Nokia (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the 14th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems CD-ROM
Publisher
ACM
Published
2016-11-14
Pages
176-189
OpenAlex
W2546536770
Cited by
236
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 1
FWCI
9.72
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo
Funders
Nvidia
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Keywords
wearable devices, memory reduction, inference acceleration

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