<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks — mentioned by Strilanc</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30558244</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2005.04305:30558244</guid><pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2022 18:11:28 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m a bit worried for that analog-matrix-multiplication-for-AI company. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the past half century is littered with companies whose value proposition was &amp;quot;our specialized thing does 10x better than digital transistors&amp;quot; and then they predictably just got steamrolled by Moore&amp;#x27;s law. And although Dennard scaling ended two decades ago, the flops-per-watt and flops-per-second of AI-specialized chips like TPUs has been improving substantially recently [1][2]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tensor_Processing_Unit#Third_g... 2: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.04305&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item><item><title>Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks — mentioned by Isinlor</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30232993</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2005.04305:30232993</guid><pubDate>Sun, 06 Feb 2022 14:53:47 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Roughly half/half, skewed more towards improvements in algorithms. Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.04305 In this work, we argue that algorithmic progress has an aspect that is both straightforward to measure and interesting: reductions over time in the compute needed to reach past capabilities. We show that the number of floating-point operations required to train a classifier to AlexNet-level performance on ImageNet has decreased by a factor of 44x between 2012 and 2019. This corresponds to algorithmic efficiency doubling every 16 months…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item><item><title>Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27458975</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2005.04305:27458975</guid><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:12:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;37 points; 3 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item><item><title>Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23293429</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2005.04305:23293429</guid><pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2020 18:21:30 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Measuring the Algorithmic Efficiency of Neural Networks&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2005.04305/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
