Exponent range — where it appears
Named by 9 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The other half of a format
fp16 and tf32 have the same eleven significand bits and their largest numbers are 65,504 and 3.4·10³⁸. For two phases this site simulated the significand alone, so it was obliged to report them as the same format — which is a claim, and a false one.
Eight bits, and a format that breaks the rules
E4M3 reuses the exponent code IEEE reserves for infinities, so it reaches 448 where the same bits under IEEE's rules would reach 240 — and has no infinity left to signal an overflow with. The same computation is a NaN on one conforming device and 448 on another.
One exponent for thirty-two numbers
Share the exponent across a block and the cost per value drops from eight bits to 6.25, and the accuracy improves — up to about three octaves of spread inside a block. Past that a single outlier deletes the thirty-one values beside it, and the 2-norm barely notices.
The units that overflow before the answer does
A change of variable that is exact in the algebra requires γ² times a matrix to be a number the format can hold. In binary64 that is a bound nobody meets by accident. In binary32 it arrives at 10¹⁹ and in fp16 at 256, and past it there is no answer rather than a poor one.
The well on the far side of the band
Gradual underflow was said to buy a predicate and not an answer, because a quantity that has decayed into the subnormal range is already lost. A quantity that passes through the band on its way somewhere else is not. The stationary distribution of a two-well chain, computed in half precision across a barrier whose top is two to the minus sixteen of the near well, keeps its far well's probability of 0.2454 to three digits with subnormals and returns exactly zero without them. The normwise backward error calls both answers exact.
The far well in a byte
Half precision's subnormals carried a two-well chain's far well ten octaves deeper than flush to zero, and the essay that measured it predicted that on the eight-bit formats the band would be worth almost nothing and starting high almost everything. Measured on nine chains, the band is worth what it always was, two or three octaves; starting at the top of the range is worth ten and fourteen; and at three significant bits the far well is lost on eight chains of nine with no exponent limit at all, because the precision fails before the range does.
Room for the step, not the value
Starting a recurrence at the top of an eight-bit format's range spends its headroom once. An exponent counter beside the stored value was predicted to spend it at every step, remove every range failure and leave only the precision. Rescaled on the value — back to one whenever it nears the bottom or the top — it does not: E4M3 still loses its far well on seven or more chains of nine, because one climbing step multiplies the value by forty and E4M3 clips silently at 448. Rescaled into a window read off the chain's own rates, it reproduces the unbounded exponent bit for bit on all 531 runs of every format, and what is left of E4M3's limit is nothing.
An octave to land in
A window read off a chain's own rates kept an eight-bit recurrence exact to sixty octaves, and its width, falling towards zero, was predicted to mark where it would stop being exact, to within an octave. It stops two to seven octaves earlier, as soon as the window is narrower than the octave a power-of-two rescale moves by. The rule that aims every step, predicted to outlast it, fails too, once the value it aims at no longer fits. A window computed for each step separately never narrows below 4.8 octaves, reproduces the unbounded exponent on every depth at which the format can still store the chain, and makes the fewest rescales of the three.
Twice the block, half the depth
An eight-bit chain kept exact by a window per step was predicted to keep exactness with one exponent shared by two states, and to lose it with four from the depth where four of its steepest steps span more than the narrowest window, 4.8 octaves. Blocks of two fail on four chains of five, at 66 to 114 octaves. Blocks of four fail at 35 to 66, two to three times deeper than the predicted 13 to 26. Every block size fails within three octaves of the depth where its block's window empties, and that depth is 4.0 to 4.6 octaves for each state a block holds.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
SignificandFp8OverflowDynamic rangeStationary distributionSubnormal numbersScalingSilent failureUnit roundoffFlush-to-zeroGradual underflowHalf-precision