Encouraging! #AppleM1 Silicon (MBA) smokes my 2017 MBP15" i7 on #rstats#tidverse tidymodels hotel example, random forests (last fit 100 trees). Experimental arm-R build = extra speedup. Thanks @fxcoudert for gfortran build & @juliasilge@topepos + team for the nice API + DOC.
And it’s wonderful to see that essential R packages are working on the M1 platform.
Another implication might be that 4 cores are a good default for parallel processing with this configuration. The original tidymodels example would select 8 cores here. tidymodels.org/start/case-stu…
Update including i9 MBP 16" results; x-axis jitter removed for clarity
Update: Using #Python I find comparable results when using the random forests from scikit-learn on the same dataset. #AppleM1 is systematically faster + the native ARM build makes a difference. Interestingly, the Intel Mac seems still faster with basic linear algebra (next tweet)
Benchmarking matrix multiplication, SVD, and eigen decomposition the i5 Intel from 2017 was fastest #NumPy.(gist.github.com/dengemann/03a0…) obviously this is not what matters for random forests. Note that M1 native (yellow) plays in the league as i5 and these are only the first builds.
Correction: It’s of course i7, not i5 – a misnomer. Still the same machine as in previous benchmarks.
As anticipated, the story with #NumPy on #AppleM1 is not quite over. With NumPy optimised for ARM via #Apple#TensorFlow M1 can beat the i7 on matrix multiplication and SVD! Excited to see what's yet to come. cc @numpy_team@PyData
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ We combined anatomical MRI (surface area, thickness, volume), fMRI-connectivity and MEG (source power, connectivity, alpha-peak, 1/f, latencies) with a stacking approach (1: ridge, 2: random forest). We made sure our model potentially extracts information from missing values.
2/ Is combining multimodal brain data worth the effort for brain age prediction? Compared to anatomical MRI, fMRI and MEG added similar improvements. Combining all modalities yielded to markedly improved prediction performance. MEG and fMRI contributed independent information!
1/ When regressing outcomes on M/EEG power spectra (f = power; f = log(power), ...), volume conduction creates a nonlinear problem that cannot be addressed with otherwise effective linear models. Source localization can fix this but is not always available. How can we do without?
2/ As long as we consider a single subject we have nearly constant volume conduction. In this case we can show mathematically that source localization can be replaced with spatial filters or with Riemannian geometry.