You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: README.md
+1-1Lines changed: 1 addition & 1 deletion
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ The MLCommons™ **AlgoPerf: Training Algorithms benchmark** is designed to find
31
31
When training neural nets, practitioners face many critical yet often opaque decisions: What optimizer to choose? How should its learning rate be tuned? What learning rate schedule should be used? These choices can make or break training, yet the community has lacked a clear, standardized way to identify the state of the art.
32
32
Unlike benchmarks focused on hardware or model architecture, AlgoPerf isolates the **training algorithm** itself, which includes the optimizer, regularization, data selection, and hyperparameters like the learning rate schedule. By standardizing the benchmark process, AlgoPerf offers a meaningful apples-to-apples comparison of training algorithms and follows the following **key principles**:
33
33
34
-
- 🎯 **Fixed Target, Model & Hardware:** Submitted training algorithms must train a set of [**fixed models**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#workloads) to a pre-defined validation performance target as fast as possible. All submissions use the same model architecture and are run on the same [**standardized hardware**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#benchmarking-hardware) (8x NVIDIA V100 GPUs). This isolates the training algorithm's performance and allows a fair apples-to-apples comparison.
34
+
- 🎯 **Fixed Target, Model & Hardware:** Submitted training algorithms must train a set of [**fixed models**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#workloads) to a pre-defined validation performance target as fast as possible. All submissions use the same model architecture and are run on the same [**standardized hardware**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#benchmarking-hardware) (4x A100 (40GB) GPUs). This isolates the training algorithm's performance and allows a fair apples-to-apples comparison.
35
35
- ⏱️ **Time-To-Result:** Submissions are evaluated based on the total wall-clock time required to reach the target, rewarding practical and efficient algorithms.
36
36
- 🧠 **Diverse Workloads:** The benchmark includes [**8 diverse deep learning workloads**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#workloads) across domains like image classification, speech recognition, and machine translation. A submission's score is computed by aggregating its performance, using [**performance profiles**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#benchmark-score-using-performance-profiles), across all workloads to ensure general-purpose algorithms.
37
37
- 📦 **Fully-Specified Algorithms:** Submissions must be complete procedures and thus hyperparameter tuning is treated as part of the algorithm. Submissions can either provide a search space for automated tuning ([**External tuning ruleset**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#external-tuning-ruleset)) or be hyperparameter-free ([**Self-tuning ruleset**](/docs/DOCUMENTATION.md#self-tuning-ruleset)) with any tuning done automatically and "on the clock". This measures an algorithm's _total_ practical cost and provides practitioners with a complete method, eliminating the guesswork of how to apply it.
0 commit comments