Vision transformers (ViTs) have excelled in computer vision (CV) tasks but are memory-consuming and computation-intensive, challenging their deployment on resource-constrained devices. To tackle this limitation, prior works have explored ViT-tailored quantization algorithms but retained floating-point scaling factors, which yield nonnegligible requantization overhead, limiting ViTs’ hardware efficiency and motivating more hardware-friendly solutions. To this end, we propose P2-ViT, the first power-of-two (PoT) posttraining quantization (PTQ) and acceleration framework to accelerate fully quantized ViTs. Specifically, as for quantization, we explore a dedicated quantization scheme to effectively quantize ViTs with PoT scaling factors, thus minimizing the requantization overhead. Furthermore, we propose coarse-to-fine automatic mixed-precision quantization to enable better accuracy-efficiency tradeoffs. In terms of hardware, we develop a dedicated chunk-based accelerator featuring multiple tailored subprocessors to individually handle ViTs’ different types of operations, alleviating reconfigurable overhead. In addition, we design a tailored row-stationary dataflow to seize the pipeline processing opportunity introduced by our PoT scaling factors, thereby enhancing throughput. Extensive experiments consistently validate P2-ViT’s effectiveness. Particularly, we offer comparable or even superior quantization performance with PoT scaling factors when compared with the counterpart with floating-point scaling factors. Besides, we achieve up to <tex-math notation="LaTeX">10.1× </tex-math> speedup and <tex-math notation="LaTeX">36.8× </tex-math> energy saving over GPU’s Turing Tensor Cores, and up to <tex-math notation="LaTeX">1.84× </tex-math> higher computation utilization efficiency against SOTA quantization-based ViT accelerators. Codes are available at <uri xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://github.com/shihuihong214/P2-ViT</uri>.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: