Xu Wen

Xu Wen, Wanling Gao, Anzheng Li et al.

Classical machine learning (CML) occupies nearly half of machine learning pipelines in production applications. Unfortunately, it fails to utilize the state-of-the-practice devices fully and performs poorly. Without a unified framework, the hybrid deployments of deep learning (DL) and CML also suffer from severe performance and portability issues. This paper presents the design of a unified compiler, called CMLCompiler, for CML inference. We propose two unified abstractions: operator representations and extended computational graphs. The CMLCompiler framework performs the conversion and graph optimization based on two unified abstractions, then outputs an optimized computational graph to DL compilers or frameworks. We implement CMLCompiler on TVM. The evaluation shows CMLCompiler's portability and superior performance. It achieves up to 4.38$\times$ speedup on CPU, 3.31$\times$ speedup on GPU, and 5.09$\times$ speedup on IoT devices, compared to the state-of-the-art solutions -- scikit-learn, intel sklearn, and hummingbird. Our performance of CML and DL mixed pipelines achieves up to 3.04x speedup compared with cross-framework implementations. The project documents and source code are available at https://www.computercouncil.org/cmlcompiler.

Zhengxin Yang, Wanling Gao, Chunjie Luo et al.

Machine learning inference should be subject to stringent inference time constraints while ensuring high inference quality, especially in safety-critical (e.g., autonomous driving) and mission-critical (e.g., emotion recognition) contexts. Neglecting either aspect can lead to severe consequences, such as loss of life and property damage. Many studies lack a comprehensive consideration of these metrics, leading to incomplete or misleading evaluations. The study unveils a counterintuitive revelation: deep learning inference quality exhibits fluctuations due to inference time. To depict this phenomenon, the authors coin a new term, "tail quality," providing a more comprehensive evaluation, and overcoming conventional metric limitations. Moreover, the research proposes an initial evaluation framework to analyze factors affecting quality fluctuations, facilitating the prediction of the potential distribution of inference quality. The effectiveness of the evaluation framework is validated through experiments conducted on deep learning models for three different tasks across four systems.

Zihan Jiang, Wanling Gao, Lei Wang et al.

In recent years, with the trend of applying deep learning (DL) in high performance scientific computing, the unique characteristics of emerging DL workloads in HPC raise great challenges in designing, implementing HPC AI systems. The community needs a new yard stick for evaluating the future HPC systems. In this paper, we propose HPC AI500 --- a benchmark suite for evaluating HPC systems that running scientific DL workloads. Covering the most representative scientific fields, each workload from HPC AI500 is based on real-world scientific DL applications. Currently, we choose 14 scientific DL benchmarks from perspectives of application scenarios, data sets, and software stack. We propose a set of metrics for comprehensively evaluating the HPC AI systems, considering both accuracy, performance as well as power and cost. We provide a scalable reference implementation of HPC AI500. HPC AI500 is a part of the open-source AIBench project, the specification and source code are publicly available from \url{http://www.benchcouncil.org/AIBench/index.html}.

Wanling Gao, Fei Tang, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Modern real-world application scenarios like Internet services consist of a diversity of AI and non-AI modules with huge code sizes and long and complicated execution paths, which raises serious benchmarking or evaluating challenges. Using AI components or micro benchmarks alone can lead to error-prone conclusions. This paper presents a methodology to attack the above challenge. We formalize a real-world application scenario as a Directed Acyclic Graph-based model and propose the rules to distill it into a permutation of essential AI and non-AI tasks, which we call a scenario benchmark. Together with seventeen industry partners, we extract nine typical scenario benchmarks. We design and implement an extensible, configurable, and flexible benchmark framework. We implement two Internet service AI scenario benchmarks based on the framework as proxies to two real-world application scenarios. We consider scenario, component, and micro benchmarks as three indispensable parts for evaluating. Our evaluation shows the advantage of our methodology against using component or micro AI benchmarks alone. The specifications, source code, testbed, and results are publicly available from \url{https://www.benchcouncil.org/aibench/scenario/}.

Fei Tang, Wanling Gao, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Earlier-stage evaluations of a new AI architecture/system need affordable benchmarks. Only using a few AI component benchmarks like MLPerfalone in the other stages may lead to misleading conclusions. Moreover, the learning dynamics are not well understood, and the benchmarks' shelf-life is short. This paper proposes a balanced benchmarking methodology. We use real-world benchmarks to cover the factors space that impacts the learning dynamics to the most considerable extent. After performing an exhaustive survey on Internet service AI domains, we identify and implement nineteen representative AI tasks with state-of-the-art models. For repeatable performance ranking (RPR subset) and workload characterization (WC subset), we keep two subsets to a minimum for affordability. We contribute by far the most comprehensive AI training benchmark suite. The evaluations show: (1) AIBench Training (v1.1) outperforms MLPerfTraining (v0.7) in terms of diversity and representativeness of model complexity, computational cost, convergent rate, computation, and memory access patterns, and hotspot functions; (2) Against the AIBench full benchmarks, its RPR subset shortens the benchmarking cost by 64%, while maintaining the primary workload characteristics; (3) The performance ranking shows the single-purpose AI accelerator like TPU with the optimized TensorFlowframework performs better than that of GPUs while losing the latter's general support for various AI models. The specification, source code, and performance numbers are available from the AIBench homepage https://www.benchcouncil.org/aibench-training/index.html.

Wanling Gao, Fei Tang, Jianfeng Zhan et al.

Domain-specific software and hardware co-design is encouraging as it is much easier to achieve efficiency for fewer tasks. Agile domain-specific benchmarking speeds up the process as it provides not only relevant design inputs but also relevant metrics, and tools. Unfortunately, modern workloads like Big data, AI, and Internet services dwarf the traditional one in terms of code size, deployment scale, and execution path, and hence raise serious benchmarking challenges. This paper proposes an agile domain-specific benchmarking methodology. Together with seventeen industry partners, we identify ten important end-to-end application scenarios, among which sixteen representative AI tasks are distilled as the AI component benchmarks. We propose the permutations of essential AI and non-AI component benchmarks as end-to-end benchmarks. An end-to-end benchmark is a distillation of the essential attributes of an industry-scale application. We design and implement a highly extensible, configurable, and flexible benchmark framework, on the basis of which, we propose the guideline for building end-to-end benchmarks, and present the first end-to-end Internet service AI benchmark. The preliminary evaluation shows the value of our benchmark suite---AIBench against MLPerf and TailBench for hardware and software designers, micro-architectural researchers, and code developers. The specifications, source code, testbed, and results are publicly available from the web site \url{http://www.benchcouncil.org/AIBench/index.html}.

Wanling Gao, Jianfeng Zhan, Lei Wang et al.

Several fundamental changes in technology indicate domain-specific hardware and software co-design is the only path left. In this context, architecture, system, data management, and machine learning communities pay greater attention to innovative big data and AI algorithms, architecture, and systems. Unfortunately, complexity, diversity, frequently-changed workloads, and rapid evolution of big data and AI systems raise great challenges. First, the traditional benchmarking methodology that creates a new benchmark or proxy for every possible workload is not scalable, or even impossible for Big Data and AI benchmarking. Second, it is prohibitively expensive to tailor the architecture to characteristics of one or more application or even a domain of applications. We consider each big data and AI workload as a pipeline of one or more classes of units of computation performed on different initial or intermediate data inputs, each class of which we call a data motif. On the basis of our previous work that identifies eight data motifs taking up most of the run time of a wide variety of big data and AI workloads, we propose a scalable benchmarking methodology that uses the combination of one or more data motifs---to represent diversity of big data and AI workloads. Following this methodology, we present a unified big data and AI benchmark suite---BigDataBench 4.0, publicly available from~\url{http://prof.ict.ac.cn/BigDataBench}. This unified benchmark suite sheds new light on domain-specific hardware and software co-design: tailoring the system and architecture to characteristics of the unified eight data motifs other than one or more application case by case. Also, for the first time, we comprehensively characterize the CPU pipeline efficiency using the benchmarks of seven workload types in BigDataBench 4.0.