PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 17, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Hidden-FFN: Exact Inference for Sparse Feed-Forward Networks via Hidden-Neuron Decomposition

View Full Paper
MPMaxime Parker

Key Points

  • This research aims to improve inference efficiency in sparse feed-forward networks by introducing a new method called Hidden-FFN (HFFN).
  • Evaluated HFFN on synthetic sparse feed-forward networks with controlled density using an Apple M1 CPU kernel.
  • Compared HFFN performance against dense ONNX Runtime and PyTorch sparse frameworks.
  • Analyzed the impact of different densities (5%, 10%, 20%) on inference speed and storage requirements.
  • HFFN achieved geometric speedups of 3.49×, 2.32×, and 1.44× over ONNX at 5%, 10%, and 20% density, respectively.
  • Storage reduced by 92.0%, 84.5%, and 69.5% at the above densities.
  • Performance benefits diminish at higher density due to increased costs from sparse indexing and indirect access.

Abstract

Feed-forward networks (FFNs) are a major source of parameters and inference cost in modern neural architectures.While pruning can produce sparse FFNs, practical speedups remain difficult because generic sparse formatsintroduce index reads, indirect memory accesses, and scatter overheads. I introduce Hidden-FFN (HFFN), an exactsparse FFN inference method that rewrites the FFN as a sum of independent hidden-neuron contributions. Eachhidden neuron is represented by a sparse up-projection support, an exact GELU activation, and a sparse down-projection support. This decomposition exposes structurally simple task-level parallelism, because hidden-neuroncontributions are independent until the final output reduction.I evaluate a compact HFFN format and a specialized Apple M1 CPU kernel on synthetic sparse FFNs withcontrolled density. The primary baseline is dense ONNX Runtime CPU inference on the equivalent dense FFN,while PyTorch sparse is included as a generic sparse framework baseline. I also include a controlled two-stage sparseC++ baseline to separate HFFN from PyTorch sparse framework overheads. On the tested 512 → 2048 → 512sweep, HFFN reaches geometric speedups of 3.49×, 2.32×, and 1.44× over ONNX at 5 %, 10 %, and 20 % density,while reducing storage by 92.0 %, 84.5 %, and 69.5 %. The advantage disappears at high density, where sparse-indexand indirect-access costs dominate.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Maxime Parker (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a3239f6d50b63ecad2053dehttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20690973
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper