Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34267622›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021

Benchmarking Highly Parallel Hardware for Spiking Neural Networks in Robotics.

Lea Steffen, Robin Koch, Stefan Ulbrich, Sven Nitzsche, Arne Roennau, Rüdiger Dillmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lea SteffenInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Robin KochInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Stefan UlbrichInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Sven NitzscheInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Arne RoennauInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Rüdiger DillmannInteractive Diagnosis and Service Systems (IDS), Intelligent Systems and Production Engineering (ISPE), FZI Research Center for Information Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal brains still outperform even the most performant machines with significantly lower speed. Nonetheless, impressive progress has been made in robotics in the areas of vision, motion- and path planning in the last decades. Brain-inspired Spiking Neural Networks (SNN) and the parallel hardware necessary to exploit their full potential have promising features for robotic application. Besides the most obvious platform for deploying SNN, brain-inspired neuromorphic hardware, Graphical Processing Units (GPU) are well capable of parallel computing as well. Libraries for generating CUDA-optimized code, like GeNN and affordable embedded systems make them an attractive alternative due to their low price and availability. While a few performance tests exist, there has been a lack of benchmarks targeting robotic applications. We compare the performance of a neural Wavefront algorithm as a representative of use cases in robotics on different hardware suitable for running SNN simulations. The SNN used for this benchmark is modeled in the simulator-independent declarative language PyNN, which allows using the same model for different simulator backends. Our emphasis is the comparison between Nest, running on serial CPU, SpiNNaker, as a representative of neuromorphic hardware, and an implementation in GeNN. Beyond that, we also investigate the differences of GeNN deployed to different hardware. A comparison between the different simulators and hardware is performed with regard to total simulation time, average energy consumption per run, and the length of the resulting path. We hope that the insights gained about performance details of parallel hardware solutions contribute to developing more efficient SNN implementations for robotics.

Indexed as

benchmarkneuroroboticparallel hardware architecturesrobotic motion controlspiking neural networks

Identifiers

PMID34267622
PMCPMC8275645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.