Alert button
Picture for Brian Anderson

Brian Anderson

Alert button

NeuroBench: Advancing Neuromorphic Computing through Collaborative, Fair and Representative Benchmarking

Apr 15, 2023
Jason Yik, Soikat Hasan Ahmed, Zergham Ahmed, Brian Anderson, Andreas G. Andreou, Chiara Bartolozzi, Arindam Basu, Douwe den Blanken, Petrut Bogdan, Sander Bohte, Younes Bouhadjar, Sonia Buckley, Gert Cauwenberghs, Federico Corradi, Guido de Croon, Andreea Danielescu, Anurag Daram, Mike Davies, Yigit Demirag, Jason Eshraghian, Jeremy Forest, Steve Furber, Michael Furlong, Aditya Gilra, Giacomo Indiveri, Siddharth Joshi, Vedant Karia, Lyes Khacef, James C. Knight, Laura Kriener, Rajkumar Kubendran, Dhireesha Kudithipudi, Gregor Lenz, Rajit Manohar, Christian Mayr, Konstantinos Michmizos, Dylan Muir, Emre Neftci, Thomas Nowotny, Fabrizio Ottati, Ayca Ozcelikkale, Noah Pacik-Nelson, Priyadarshini Panda, Sun Pao-Sheng, Melika Payvand, Christian Pehle, Mihai A. Petrovici, Christoph Posch, Alpha Renner, Yulia Sandamirskaya, Clemens JS Schaefer, André van Schaik, Johannes Schemmel, Catherine Schuman, Jae-sun Seo, Sadique Sheik, Sumit Bam Shrestha, Manolis Sifalakis, Amos Sironi, Kenneth Stewart, Terrence C. Stewart, Philipp Stratmann, Guangzhi Tang, Jonathan Timcheck, Marian Verhelst, Craig M. Vineyard, Bernhard Vogginger, Amirreza Yousefzadeh, Biyan Zhou, Fatima Tuz Zohora, Charlotte Frenkel, Vijay Janapa Reddi

Figure 1 for NeuroBench: Advancing Neuromorphic Computing through Collaborative, Fair and Representative Benchmarking

The field of neuromorphic computing holds great promise in terms of advancing computing efficiency and capabilities by following brain-inspired principles. However, the rich diversity of techniques employed in neuromorphic research has resulted in a lack of clear standards for benchmarking, hindering effective evaluation of the advantages and strengths of neuromorphic methods compared to traditional deep-learning-based methods. This paper presents a collaborative effort, bringing together members from academia and the industry, to define benchmarks for neuromorphic computing: NeuroBench. The goals of NeuroBench are to be a collaborative, fair, and representative benchmark suite developed by the community, for the community. In this paper, we discuss the challenges associated with benchmarking neuromorphic solutions, and outline the key features of NeuroBench. We believe that NeuroBench will be a significant step towards defining standards that can unify the goals of neuromorphic computing and drive its technological progress. Please visit for the latest updates on the benchmark tasks and metrics.

Viaarxiv icon

MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Nov 06, 2019
Vijay Janapa Reddi, Christine Cheng, David Kanter, Peter Mattson, Guenther Schmuelling, Carole-Jean Wu, Brian Anderson, Maximilien Breughe, Mark Charlebois, William Chou, Ramesh Chukka, Cody Coleman, Sam Davis, Pan Deng, Greg Diamos, Jared Duke, Dave Fick, J. Scott Gardner, Itay Hubara, Sachin Idgunji, Thomas B. Jablin, Jeff Jiao, Tom St. John, Pankaj Kanwar, David Lee, Jeffery Liao, Anton Lokhmotov, Francisco Massa, Peng Meng, Paulius Micikevicius, Colin Osborne, Gennady Pekhimenko, Arun Tejusve Raghunath Rajan, Dilip Sequeira, Ashish Sirasao, Fei Sun, Hanlin Tang, Michael Thomson, Frank Wei, Ephrem Wu, Lingjie Xu, Koichi Yamada, Bing Yu, George Yuan, Aaron Zhong, Peizhao Zhang, Yuchen Zhou

Figure 1 for MLPerf Inference Benchmark
Figure 2 for MLPerf Inference Benchmark
Figure 3 for MLPerf Inference Benchmark
Figure 4 for MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and four orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf implements a set of rules and practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. In this paper, we present the method and design principles of the initial MLPerf Inference release. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that show a range of capabilities.

Viaarxiv icon