analiza aiqbench
This research introduces a data-driven method for calibrating error tolerances in tensor kernel tests by analyzing actual GPU execution results rather than relying on static, hand-picked thresholds. By tightening these limits based on observed correct implementations, the study significantly improves bug detection rates while maintaining acceptable false-positive levels across various operations and precision types.
Operator-Aware Mixed-Precision Tolerance Calibration for Tensor Kernels
arXiv:2607.16228v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Most tensor-kernel correctness tests go through a fixed-shape all close-style check with hand-picked absolute and relative tolerances. The thresholds are copied across the corpus and rarely revisited. We mine the element-wise error distribution of every test case from accumulated cloud GPU runs across the 26-entry gpuemu corpus and 2 dtypes (8,076 result rows). We then ask one empirical question: what absolute tolerance would the kernel itself, observed under its correct implementation, justify? The answer is much tighter than the current hand-picked atol. The largest tightening is attention_triton fp16 at $2{,}184\times$. Restricted to the seven LLM-style buggy variants for which the corpus ships a paired correct counterpart, calibrated per-(op, dtype) tolerances raise bug-detection recall from 73.2% (1,805 of 2,467) to 82.4% (2,034 of 2,467), an absolute gain of 9.3 percentage points (+229 new detections). The control false-positive count rises from 0 to 20 out of 1,882 correct-control cases (+1.1 percentage points).
Abstract:Most tensor-kernel correctness tests go through a fixed-shape all close-style check with hand-picked absolute and relative tolerances. The thresholds are copied across the corpus and rarely revisited. We mine the element-wise error distribution of every test case from accumulated cloud GPU runs across the 26-entry gpuemu corpus and 2 dtypes (8,076 result rows). We then ask one empirical question: what absolute tolerance would the kernel itself, observed under its correct implementation, justify? The answer is much tighter than the current hand-picked atol. The largest tightening is attention_triton fp16 at $2{,}184\times$. Restricted to the seven LLM-style buggy variants for which the corpus ships a paired correct counterpart, calibrated per-(op, dtype) tolerances raise bug-detection recall from 73.2% (1,805 of 2,467) to 82.4% (2,034 of 2,467), an absolute gain of 9.3 percentage points (+229 new detections). The control false-positive count rises from 0 to 20 out of 1,882 correct-control cases (+1.1 percentage points).
8 pages, 1 figure, LNCS format. Companion paper: arXiv:2606.20128 (P1). Additional companions (P3, P4) to follow on arXiv this week; IDs will be added in a v2 replace
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Mathematical Software (cs.MS)
arXiv:2607.16228 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2607.16228v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 192 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · 17 sept. 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · 7 iun. 2026

GEM Training: How Meta Doubled the Efficiency of Its LLM-Scale Ads Foundation Model
Meta Engineering · 3 aug. 2026

Building Blocks for Foundation Model Training and Inference on AWS
Hugging Face · 11 mai 2026