5 ms·
This is very interesting, because I've always thought that all NN performance should be measured in a unit with energy in the denominator.
by fouronnes3 3y ago
This is very interesting, because I've always thought that all NN performance should be measured in a unit with energy in the denominator.
- eru 3y agoIt totally depends on what you want to use a measure for. Just like neither height or volume alone will tell you what will fit in your car. By any measure that puts energy used by the brain in the denominator, humans are probably dumber than ants. But that doesn't mean those measures are always accurate. (For contemporary neural networks, you also have to distinguish training costs from inference costs.)
- nojvek 3y agoTo add more context, humans are 100W biological machines. Brain is ~20% of that power - 20W. The greatest form of general intelligence at 20W. A MacBook Air is ~30W. https://www.jackery.com/blogs/knowledge/how-many-watts-a-laptop-uses https://www.jackery.com/blogs/knowledge/how-many-watts-a-lap...
- renonce 3y agoIt is “the greatest” because we only appreciate intelligence that we ourselves understand. A 0.0001W calculator calculates arithmetic faster than any human brain.
- beebmam 3y agoYou're leaving out the training requirements
- pyinstallwoes 3y agoThat’s not entirely fair. That’s run time cost but not the same cost to information ratio and the cost of drawing from that pool. Given a laptop is at 30W how much can a laptop do disconnected from the internet? Now how much can it do with the internet? Now how much information does the internet cost in terms of wattage? Now what’s the ratio?
- eru 3y agoWhat can a human do disconnected from society?
- chubot 3y agoI dispute that, if the metric is a chess game between an ant and a human
- quickthrower2 3y agoFor inference that could be useful, but the energy is not for the model it is for at least the tuple of: model, model architecture and compilation, and hardware chosen.