Cited by 48Embedded Systems Design TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques

A length adaptive algorithm-hardware co-design of transformer on FPGA through sparse attention and dynamic pipelining

Open access
Peng, Hongwu, Huang, Shaoyi, Chen, Shiyang, Li, Bingbing, Geng, Tong, Li, Ang, Jiang, Weiwen, Wen, Wujie +3 more·2022·Proceedings of the 59th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference

Abstract

Transformers are considered one of the most important deep learning models since 2018, in part because it establishes state-of-the-art (SOTA) records and could potentially replace existing Deep Neural Networks (DNNs). Despite the remarkable triumphs, the prolonged turnaround time of Transformer models is a widely recognized roadblock. The variety of sequence lengths imposes additional computing overhead where inputs need to be zero-padded to the maximum sentence length in the batch to accommodate the parallel computing platforms. This paper targets the field-programmable gate array (FPGA) and proposes a coherent sequence length adaptive algorithm-hardware co-design for Transformer acceleration. Particularly, we develop a hardware-friendly sparse attention operator and a length-aware hardware resource scheduling algorithm. The proposed sparse attention operator brings the complexity of attention-based models down to linear complexity and alleviates the off-chip memory traffic. The proposed length-aware resource hardware scheduling algorithm dynamically allocates the hardware resources to fill up the pipeline slots and eliminates bubbles for NLP tasks. Experiments show that our design has very small accuracy loss and has 80.2 × and 2.6 × speedup compared to CPU and GPU implementation, and 4 × higher energy efficiency than state-of-the-art GPU accelerator optimized via CUBLAS GEMM.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3489517.3530585

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peng, H., Huang, S., Chen, S., Li, B., Geng, T., Li, A., Jiang, W., Wen, W., Bi, J., Liu, H., & Ding, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Connecticut (US)
  • Stevens Institute of Technology (US)
  • Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
  • Lehigh University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 59th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference
Publisher
ACM
Published
2022-07-10
Pages
1135-1140
ISSN
0738-100X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4293023328
Cited by
48
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6
FWCI
8.25
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • NSF CRII Award (2000722)
  • U.S. DOE Office of Science, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (66150)
  • NSF CAREER Award (2011236; 2006748; 2046102)
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 › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › VLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Keywords
transformer acceleration, FPGA acceleration, sparse attention, pipeline bubbles, energy efficiency

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