Metaphoric coherence: Distinguishing verbal metaphor from `anomaly\u27

Theories and computational models of metaphor comprehension generally circumvent the question of metaphor versus “anomaly” in favor of a treatment of metaphor versus literal language. Making the distinction between metaphoric and “anomalous” expressions is subject to wide variation in judgment, yet humans agree that some potentially metaphoric expressions are much more comprehensible than others. In the context of a program which interprets simple isolated sentences that are potential instances of cross‐modal and other verbal metaphor, I consider some possible coherence criteria which must be satisfied for an expression to be “conceivable” metaphorically. Metaphoric constraints on object nominals are represented as abstracted or extended along with the invariant structural components of the verb meaning in a metaphor. This approach distinguishes what is preserved in metaphoric extension from that which is “violated”, thus referring to both “similarity” and “dissimilarity” views of metaphor. The role and potential limits of represented abstracted properties and constraints is discussed as they relate to the recognition of incoherent semantic combinations and the rejection or adjustment of metaphoric interpretations

MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. In this paper, we present our benchmarking method for evaluating ML inference systems. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf prescribes a set of rules and best practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 reproducible inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that showcase a wide range of capabilities. The submissions attest to the benchmark's flexibility and adaptability.Comment: ISCA 202

The Recommendation Architecture: Lessons from Large-Scale Electronic Systems Applied to Cognition

A fundamental approach of cognitive science is to understand cognitive systems by separating them into modules. Theoretical reasons are described which force any system which learns to perform a complex combination of real time functions into a modular architecture. Constraints on the way modules divide up functionality are also described. The architecture of such systems, including biological systems, is constrained into a form called the recommendation architecture, with a primary separation between clustering and competition. Clustering is a modular hierarchy which manages the interactions between functions on the basis of detection of functionally ambiguous repetition. Change to previously detected repetitions is limited in order to maintain a meaningful, although partially ambiguous context for all modules which make use of the previously defined repetitions. Competition interprets the repetition conditions detected by clustering as a range of alternative behavioural recommendations, and uses consequence feedback to learn to select the most appropriate recommendation. The requirements imposed by functional complexity result in very specific structures and processes which resemble those of brains. The design of an implemented electronic version of the recommendation architecture is described, and it is demonstrated that the system can heuristically define its own functionality, and learn without disrupting earlier learning. The recommendation architecture is compared with a range of alternative cognitive architectural proposals, and the conclusion reached that it has substantial potential both for understanding brains and for designing systems to perform cognitive functions