Daily Papers

Native real-time audio engines meet audio deadlines but are hard to connect to machine-learning workflows, while tensor frameworks integrate with machine learning but process audio as offline batches without timing guarantees; runtime layers built on them inherit the host's scheduling and deployment footprint. This paper presents Fluxion, a Rust audio DSP runtime for cascaded second-order sections, FIR filters, and delay-line effects. Fluxion implements the parts that are specific to DSP: closed-form filter design, forward kernels, analytic adjoints for the recursion, and stability checks. It relies on existing libraries for the autodiff graph, GPU code generation (tested here on CUDA), and array interchange. One graph algebra is lowered to a differentiable training engine and to an allocation-free real-time engine; between them, a trained graph is checked for stability and frozen into a versioned artifact that an edge device checks again before playback. We compare Fluxion with six framework-hosted and native baselines under one float32 protocol. Among the systems that compute the exact recursion, Fluxion has the highest GPU throughput when data stays on the device and the highest throughput on most CPU workloads, while its CPU training step is slower than those of torchaudio and GRAFX. Its test suite checks the audio thread for allocations with an instrumented allocator, and we report measured latency tails. Fluxion is open source at https://github.com/matteospanio/fluxion.

As the artificial intelligence (AI) supply chain grows more complex, AI systems and models are increasingly likely to incorporate externally-sourced ingredients such as datasets and other models. In such cases, determining whether or not an AI system or model complies with the EU AI Act will require gathering compliance-related metadata about both the AI system or model at-large as well as those externally-supplied ingredients. There must then be an analysis that looks across all of this metadata to render a prediction about the compliance of the overall AI system or model. Up until now, this process has not been automated. Thus, it has not been possible to make real-time compliance determinations in scenarios where doing so would be advantageous, such as the iterative workflows of today's AI developers, search and acquisition of AI ingredients on communities like Hugging Face, federated and continuous learning, and more. To address this shortcoming, we introduce a highly automated system for AI Act compliance analysis. This system has two key elements. First is an interlocking set of computational artifacts that capture compliance-related metadata about both: (1) the AI system or model at-large; (2) any constituent ingredients such as datasets and models. Second is an automated analysis algorithm that operates across those computational artifacts to render a run-time prediction about whether or not the overall AI system or model complies with the AI Act. Working together, these elements promise to enhance and accelerate AI Act compliance assessments.

Optimization in machine learning, both theoretical and applied, is presently dominated by first-order gradient methods such as stochastic gradient descent. Second-order optimization methods, that involve second derivatives and/or second order statistics of the data, are far less prevalent despite strong theoretical properties, due to their prohibitive computation, memory and communication costs. In an attempt to bridge this gap between theoretical and practical optimization, we present a scalable implementation of a second-order preconditioned method (concretely, a variant of full-matrix Adagrad), that along with several critical algorithmic and numerical improvements, provides significant convergence and wall-clock time improvements compared to conventional first-order methods on state-of-the-art deep models. Our novel design effectively utilizes the prevalent heterogeneous hardware architecture for training deep models, consisting of a multicore CPU coupled with multiple accelerator units. We demonstrate superior performance compared to state-of-the-art on very large learning tasks such as machine translation with Transformers, language modeling with BERT, click-through rate prediction on Criteo, and image classification on ImageNet with ResNet-50.

This document serves as an overview of the different mechanisms and areas of governance in the BigCode project. It aims to support transparency by providing relevant information about choices that were made during the project to the broader public, and to serve as an example of intentional governance of an open research project that future endeavors can leverage to shape their own approach. The first section, Project Structure, covers the project organization, its stated goals and values, its internal decision processes, and its funding and resources. The second section, Data and Model Governance, covers decisions relating to the questions of data subject consent, privacy, and model release.