Sacrificing Accuracy For Speed and Efficiency In Processors

Skudd writes "Modern computing has always been reliant on accuracy and correct answers. Now, a professor at Rice University in Houston posits that some future applications could be revolutionized by 'probabilistic computing.' Quoting: 'This afternoon, Krishna Palem, speaking at a computer science meeting in San Francisco, will announce results of the first real-world test of his probabilistic computer chip: The chip, which thrives on random errors, ran seven times faster than today's best technology while using just 1/30th the electricity. ... The high density of transistors on existing chips also leads to a lot of background "noise." To compensate, engineers increase the voltage applied to computer circuits to overpower the noise and ensure precise calculations. Palem began wondering how much a slight reduction in the quality of calculations might improve speed and save energy. He soon realized that some information was more valuable than other information. For example, in calculating a bank balance of $13,000.81, getting the "13" correct is much more important than the "81." Producing an answer of $13,000.57 is much closer to being correct than $57,000.81. While Palem's technology may not have a future in calculating missions to Mars, it probably has one in such applications as streaming music and video on mobile devices, he said.'

Comments

Bank balance

[johnny cashed]

And $81,000.31 is a much more correct answer!

Reminds me of...

[rob1980]

Q: Why didn't Intel call the Pentium the 586?
A: Because they added 486 and 100 on the first Pentium and got 585.999983605.

Re:Reminds me of...

[machine321]

My computer's not slow, it's just being careful.

Accuracy with financial calculations.

[onion2k]

Accuracy with financial calculations is extremely important. Hasn't this guy ever watched Superman 3?

wll,

[greenguy]

i scrfcd accrc 4 spd a lng tm ago

Re:wll,

[vux984]

i scrfcd accrc 4 spd a lng tm ago

and it was going so well too... until you got thirsty and told your friend ..

"hy! I wnt sm ck!"

Top Ten Slogans

[AmigaHeretic]

TOP TEN SLOGANS FOR THIS NEW PROCESSOR:

9.9999973251 - It's a FLAW, Dammit, not a Bug

8.9999163362 - It's the new math

7.9999414610 - Nearly 300 Correct Opcodes

6.9999831538 - "You Don't Need to Know What's Inside" (tm)

5.9999835137 - Redefining the PC -- and Mathematics As Well

4.9999999021 - We Fixed It, Really

3.9998245917 - Division Considered Harmful

2.9991523619 - Why Do You Think They Call It *Floating* Point?

1.9999103517 - We're Looking for a Few Good Flaws

0.9999999998 - "The Errata Inside" (tm)

Re:Top Ten Slogans

[gbjbaanb]

TOP TEN SLOGANS:

runs Excel just as well as always :-)

Re:Hmmm

[BadAnalogyGuy]

You get a one-way ticket to pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Watch out for your cornhole, bud.

Re:Hmmm

[PitViper401]

But what about the conjugal visits?!

Obligatory NASA research

[DirePickle]

From NASA:

Computer scientist Arthur Boran was ecstatic. A few minutes earlier, he had programmed a basic mathematical problem into his prototypical Akron I computer. His request was simply, "Give me the sum of every odd number between zero and ten." The computer's quick answer, 157, was unexpected, to say the least. With growing excitement, Boran requested an explanation of the computer's reasoning. The printout read as follows: THE TERM "ODD NUMBER" IS AMBIGUOUS. I THEREFORE CHOOSE TO INTERPRET IT AS MEANING "A NUMBER THAT IS FUNNY LOOKING." USING MY AESTHETIC JUDGEMENT, I PICKED THE NUMBERS 3, 8, AND 147, ADDED THEM UP, AND GOT 157.

A few moments later there was an addendum: I GUESS I MEANT 158.

Followed shortly thereafter by: 147 IS MORE THAN 10, ISN'T IT? SORRY.

Re:Sacrifices are expected

[ljw1004]

That was a very confusing video. What I learned from it: you haven't done some stuff, Zoom Fish!, widgets, Zoom Fish!, behind schedule, zoom, Fish!, widget framework, Fish!

I guess it's a system that lets you zoom in on fish?