Design Rules for Extreme-Edge Scientific Computing on AI Engines
For developers of extreme-edge scientific applications, this provides design rules to choose between AI Engines and programmable logic, addressing a scalability bottleneck.
This work characterizes AI Engines vs. programmable logic for extreme-edge scientific neural networks, introducing a LARE metric to identify when AI Engines outperform PL, and demonstrates deployment of networks that cannot fit on PL using hls4ml.
Extreme-edge scientific applications use machine learning models to analyze sensor data and make real-time decisions. Their stringent latency and throughput requirements demand small batch sizes and require that model weights remain fully on-chip. Spatial dataflow implementations are common for extreme-edge applications. Spatial dataflow works well for small networks, but it fails to scale to larger models due to inherent resource scaling limitations. AI Engines on modern FPGA SoCs offer a promising alternative with high compute density and additional on-chip memory. However, the architecture, programming model, and performance-scaling behavior of AI Engines differ fundamentally from those of the programmable logic, making direct comparison non-trivial and the benefits of using AI Engines unclear. This work addresses how and when extreme-edge scientific neural networks should be implemented on AI Engines versus programmable logic. We provide systematic architectural characterization and micro-benchmarking and introduce a latency-adjusted resource equivalence (LARE) metric that identifies when AI Engine implementations outperform programmable logic designs. We further propose spatial and API-level dataflow optimizations tailored to low-latency scientific inference. Finally, we demonstrate the successful deployment of end-to-end neural networks on AI Engines that cannot fit on programmable logic when using the hlsml toolchain.