Stochastic Inference in Bitwise Neural Networks: Comparison with Ensemble Methods on CIFAR-100
Abstract
Abstract: Recently published methods enable training of bitwise neural networks which allow reduced representation of down to a single bit per weight. We present a method that exploits ensemble decisions based on multiple stochastically sampled network models to increase performance figures of bitwise neural networks in terms of classification accuracy at inference. Our experiments with the CIFAR-10 and GTSRB datasets show that the performance of such network ensembles surpasses the performance of the high-precision base model. With this technique we achieve 5.81\% best classification error on CIFAR-10 t
Research Question
How does the stochastic inference technique in bitwise neural networks compare to other ensemble methods (e.g., snapshot ensembles, Monte Carlo dropout) in terms of classification accuracy and computational overhead when evaluated on the CIFAR-100 dataset?
Verification Level
| Paper level | L2, Source-grounded claims | |
| Source-grounded claims | 7 | |
| Claim record source | parsed source sections |
Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.
Truth-Engine Gate Verdict
| Status | Verified | |
| Gate | Gate 2 — Verification (formal proof or sandbox reproduction) | |
| Reason | Sealed-sandbox formula repro: Computed 60000.0 matches expected 60000.0 (tolerance=5.0%). | |
| Evaluated | 2026-06-11T18:41:31.294307+00:00 |
This record has passed Gate 2: a Lean4 proof source type-checks, or a sealed-sandbox run reproduced the reported results within the stated tolerance. A reproducible artifact (proof source or repro script and results) is attached to this record. VERIFIED requires an attached reproducible artifact (Lean4 proof source, or repro script and results) before this status can be set; it is not derived from review score or claim count.
Quality Tier
| Tier | Flagship candidate | |
| Basis | Review score, verified-claim count, and public artifact coverage meet flagship-candidate thresholds. |
Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.
Quality Dimensions
| Evidence strength | MEDIUM | |
| Citation grounding | MEDIUM | |
| Uncertainty disclosure | MEDIUM | |
| Reproducibility status | HIGH |
Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.
Correction Record
| Status | CURRENT |
| Correction count | 0 |
| Manifest contract | paper-manifest-v1.1 |
| Correction contract | correction-record-v1 |
Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.
Provenance
| Publisher | Assignee Research |
| Public provenance | L4, External archival record |
| Report artifact | Available |
| External record | Registered |
| Claim lineage | 7 aggregate source-grounded claims |
| Review method | Automated multi-reviewer assessment |
| Quality guide | How to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links |
| Provenance contract | source-provenance-v1 |
| Note | Machine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research. |