Firstly, many machine learning models use optimization algorithms which require access to derivatives of the model.

Pushing the boundaries of machine learning often requires exploring different hardware and software combinations. However, this ability to experiment with different systems can be at odds with the drive for efficiency, which has produced increasingly specialized AI hardware and incentivized consolidation around a narrow set of ML frameworks. Exploratory research can be further restricted if software and hardware are co-evolving, making it even harder to stray away from a given tooling stack. While this friction increasingly impacts the rate of innovation in machine learning, to our knowledge the lack of portability in tooling has not been quantified. In this work we ask: How portable are popular ML software frameworks? We conduct a large scale study of the portability of mainstream ML frameworks across different hardware types. Our findings paint an uncomfortable picture -- frameworks can lose more than 40% of their key functions when ported to other hardware. Worse, even when functions are portable, the slowdown in their performance can be extreme. Collectively, our results reveal how costly straying from a narrow set of hardware-software combinations can be - and thus how specialization incurs an exploration cost that can impede innovation in machine learning research.

Firstly, many machine learning models use optimization algorithms which require access to derivatives of the model.

Given the significant advances in machine learning techniques on mobile devices, particularly in the domain of computer vision, in this work we quantitatively study the performance characteristics of 190 real-world vision transformers (ViTs) on mobile devices. Through a comparison with 102 real-world convolutional neural networks (CNNs), we provide insights into the factors that influence the latency of ViT architectures on mobile devices. Based on these insights, we develop a dataset including measured latencies of 1000 synthetic ViTs with representative building blocks and state-of-the-art architectures from two machine learning frameworks and six mobile platforms. Using this dataset, we show that inference latency of new ViTs can be predicted with sufficient accuracy for real-world applications.

Modern machine learning (ML) training workloads place substantial demands on both computational and communication resources. Consequently, accurate performance estimation has become increasingly critical for guiding system design decisions, such as the selection of parallelization strategies, cluster configurations, and hardware provisioning. Existing simulation-based performance estimation requires reimplementing the ML framework in a simulator, which demands significant manual effort and is hard to maintain as ML frameworks evolve rapidly. This paper introduces Phantora, a hybrid GPU cluster simulator designed for performance estimation of ML training workloads. Phantora executes unmodified ML frameworks as is within a distributed, containerized environment. Each container emulates the behavior of a GPU server in a large-scale cluster, while Phantora intercepts and simulates GPU- and communication-related operations to provide high-fidelity performance estimation. We call this approach hybrid simulation of ML systems, in contrast to traditional methods that simulate static workloads. The primary advantage of hybrid simulation is that it allows direct reuse of ML framework source code in simulation, avoiding the need for reimplementation. Our evaluation shows that Phantora provides accuracy comparable to static workload simulation while supporting three state-of-the-art LLM training frameworks out-of-the-box. In addition, Phantora operates on a single GPU, eliminating the need for the resource-intensive trace collection and workload extraction steps required by traditional trace-based simulators. Phantora is open-sourced at https://github.com/QDelta/Phantora.

Recent work has started to tackle this automated machine learning (AutoML) problem with the help of efficient Bayesian optimization methods.

Breast cancer (BC) remains a significant global health challenge, with personalized treatment selection complicated by the disease's molecular and clinical heterogeneity. BC treatment decisions rely on various patient-specific clinical factors, and machine learning (ML) offers a powerful approach to predicting treatment outcomes. This study utilizes The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) breast cancer clinical dataset to develop ML models for predicting the likelihood of undergoing chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. The models are trained using five-fold cross-validation and evaluated through performance metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, specificity, sensitivity, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model uncertainty is assessed using bootstrap techniques, while SHAP values enhance interpretability by identifying key predictors. Among the tested models, the Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) achieves the highest stable performance (accuracy = 0.7718, AUROC = 0.8252), followed by Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) (accuracy = 0.7557, AUROC = 0.8044) and Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost) (accuracy = 0.7552, AUROC = 0.8016). These findings underscore the potential of ML in supporting personalized breast cancer treatment decisions through data-driven insights.

Software bloat refers to code and features that is not used by a software during runtime. For Machine Learning (ML) systems, bloat is a major contributor to their technical debt leading to decreased performance and resource wastage. In this work, we present, Negativa-ML, a novel tool to identify and remove bloat in ML frameworks by analyzing their shared libraries. Our approach includes novel techniques to detect and locate unnecessary code within device code - a key area overlooked by existing research, which focuses primarily on host code. We evaluate Negativa-ML using four popular ML frameworks across ten workloads over 300 shared libraries. The results demonstrate that the ML frameworks are highly bloated on both the device and host code side. On average, Negativa-ML reduces the device code size in these frameworks by up to 75% and the host code by up to 72%, resulting in total file size reductions of up to 55%. The device code is a primary source of bloat within ML frameworks. Through debloating, we achieve reductions in peak host memory usage, peak GPU memory usage, and execution time by up to 74.6%, 69.6%, and 44.6%, respectively. Software bloat can cause a range of issues, including decreased performance, increased resource usage, Machine learning (ML) has affected many industries significantly.

--Machine learning (ML) codebases face unprecedented challenges in maintaining code quality and sustainability as their complexity grows exponentially. While traditional code smell detection tools exist, they fail to address ML-specific issues that can significantly impact model performance, reproducibility, and maintainability. This paper introduces MLScent, a novel static analysis tool that leverages sophisticated Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) analysis to detect anti-patterns and code smells specific to ML projects. MLScent implements 76 distinct detectors across major ML frameworks including T ensorFlow (13 detectors), PyT orch (12 detectors), Scikit-learn (9 detectors), and Hugging Face (10 detectors), along with data science libraries like Pandas and NumPy (8 detectors each). Our evaluation demonstrates MLScent's effectiveness through both quantitative classification metrics and qualitative assessment via user studies feedback with ML practitioners. Results show high accuracy in identifying framework-specific anti-patterns, data handling issues, and general ML code smells across real-world projects. The software development landscape has undergone a dramatic transformation with the integration of Machine Learning (ML). Recent statistics from Gartner highlight this shift, revealing a striking 270% increase in ML adoption within enterprise software projects over the last four years [1]. This rapid adoption, however, brings its own set of complexities. Traditional software development practices have had to evolve significantly to accommodate ML's unique requirements, including the need for extensive datasets, sophisticated algorithms, and iterative development cycles [3]. These fundamental differences have catalyzed a complete reimagining of software development methodologies, from initial design through testing and maintenance [4], [5] which is also highlighted by Tang et al. [6] in their empirical study of ML systems refactoring and technical debt. ML projects introduce distinct code quality challenges that set them apart from conventional software development. The complexity stems from their inherent characteristics: intricate mathematical operations, extensive data preprocessing requirements, and sophisticated model architectures that challenge traditional code maintenance approaches [7].

Pushing the boundaries of machine learning often requires exploring different hardware and software combinations. However, this ability to experiment with different systems can be at odds with the drive for efficiency, which has produced increasingly specialized AI hardware and incentivized consolidation around a narrow set of ML frameworks. Exploratory research can be further restricted if software and hardware are co-evolving, making it even harder to stray away from a given tooling stack. While this friction increasingly impacts the rate of innovation in machine learning, to our knowledge the lack of portability in tooling has not been quantified. In this work we ask: How portable are popular ML software frameworks?