Finding Deep-Learning Compilation Bugs with NNSmith

Deep-learning (DL) compilers such as TVM and TensorRT are increasingly used to optimize deep neural network (DNN) models to meet performance, resource utilization and other requirements. Bugs in these compilers can produce optimized models whose semantics differ from the original models, and produce incorrect results impacting the correctness of down stream applications. However, finding bugs in these compilers is challenging due to their complexity. In this work, we propose a new fuzz testing approach for finding bugs in deep-learning compilers. Our core approach uses (i) light-weight operator specifications to generate diverse yet valid DNN models allowing us to exercise a large part of the compiler's transformation logic; (ii) a gradient-based search process for finding model inputs that avoid any floating-point exceptional values during model execution, reducing the chance of missed bugs or false alarms; and (iii) differential testing to identify bugs. We implemented this approach in NNSmith which has found 65 new bugs in the last seven months for TVM, TensorRT, ONNXRuntime, and PyTorch. Of these 52 have been confirmed and 44 have been fixed by project maintainers.

Measuring the Effect of Training Data on Deep Learning Predictions via Randomized Experiments

We develop a new, principled algorithm for estimating the contribution of training data points to the behavior of a deep learning model, such as a specific prediction it makes. Our algorithm estimates the AME, a quantity that measures the expected (average) marginal effect of adding a data point to a subset of the training data, sampled from a given distribution. When subsets are sampled from the uniform distribution, the AME reduces to the well-known Shapley value. Our approach is inspired by causal inference and randomized experiments: we sample different subsets of the training data to train multiple submodels, and evaluate each submodel's behavior. We then use a LASSO regression to jointly estimate the AME of each data point, based on the subset compositions. Under sparsity assumptions ($k \ll N$ datapoints have large AME), our estimator requires only $O(k\log N)$ randomized submodel trainings, improving upon the best prior Shapley value estimators.

How to Train your DNN: The Network Operator Edition

Deep Neural Nets have hit quite a crest, But physical networks are where they must rest, And here we put them all to the test, To see which network optimization is best.