Quantcast
issue
Read articles, including Science News stories written for ages 9-14, on the SNK website.
Imperfect chip pretty darn good
High error rates no obstacle in some applications
A+ A- Text Size

High error rates no obstacle in some applications

By Rachel Ehrenberg

Web edition: May 22, 2012

Enlarge
Computer chips that are less than perfect can still be useful in some applications. Rice University researchers found that people were willing to put up with video images produced by a chip with a 7.58 percent error rate (right). Output from a regular chip is at left; the middle image was produced by a processor with 0.54 percent error.
Rice University/CSEM/NTU

To err is not only human — it’s silicon. Computer chips that are designed to make mistakes are faster, smaller and more energy efficient than their perfect counterparts. Scientists interviewed dozens of humans about acceptable levels of error in video visuals and then used a mathematical algorithm to fine-tune a chip to take shortcuts and make tolerable processing mistakes. Regular processing yields a sharp image (left), but a relative error of 0.54 percent is still pretty good (center), the team reported May 15 at the ACM Computing Frontiers conference in Cagliari, Italy. The chip with a 7.58 percent error rate (right) is about 15 times more efficient than an ordinary chip in speed, space and energy use. Led by Krishna Palem of Rice University in Houston, the researchers have built 10 chip prototypes and the hardware will go into thousands of low-cost I-slate tablets for use in classrooms in India. The researchers are now investigating tolerable error rates for chips in hearing aids.

Comment
Print Friendly and PDF

A. Lingamneni et al. Algorithmic methodologies for ultra-efficient inexact architectures for sustaining technology scaling. ACM Computing Frontiers conference, Cagliari, Italy, May 15, 2012. Paper: [Go to]

Comments (1)

Please alert Science News to any inappropriate posts by clicking the REPORT SPAM link within the post. Comments will be reviewed before posting.

  • "Faster, smaller and more efficient, processors with that cut corners can still be good for some applications."

    How am I supposed to understand this headline (in the email?)
    Something got left out after "with" (e.g like "errors," ) or drop the "with" altogether?
    rocketmouse rocketmouse
    Jun. 19, 2012 at 9:30am
Registered readers are invited to post a comment. To encourage fruitful discussion, please keep your comments relevant, brief and courteous. Offensive, irrelevant, nonsensical and commercial posts will not be published. (All links will be removed from comments.)

You must register with Science News to add a comment. To log-in click here. To register as a new user, follow this link.

Follow Us