IP Library Granted Patent US 12,725,093
Granted Patent B2
US 12,725,093 · App. 17/704,121 · Granted Sep 1, 2026

Systems and methods for multi-factor model selection and promotion

Inventors: Balasubramanian Chandrasekaran (Austin, TX); Lucas Avery Wilson (Cedar Park, TX); Dharmesh M. Patel (Round Rock, TX)
Assignee: Dell Products L.P.
G06N20/20
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,725,093
App. No.
17/704,121
Granted
Sep 1, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A model selection method includes: receiving a request to train or validate a plurality of models where the request includes training data and one or more trigger conditions; obtaining the models from a model catalog and training the models using the training data to obtain results for each of the one or more trigger conditions; and selecting, based on the results of each of the one or more trigger conditions and from among the models, a best model to be pushed to production.

Claims (36)

1 . A model selection method comprising:

receiving a request to train or validate a plurality of machine learning models, wherein the request comprising training data and one or more trigger conditions, wherein the trigger conditions specify;

model accuracy;

model latency;

model size;

amount of computing resources required for training; and

requirements and restrictions;

obtaining the machine learning models from a model catalog;

training the machine learning models using the training data to obtain results for each of the one or more trigger conditions;

selecting, based on the results of each of the one or more trigger conditions, on the requirements and restrictions, and from among the machine learning models, a best model to be pushed to production, wherein the requirements and restrictions specify lower model latency should be prioritized over model accuracy and that model accuracy should be at least 90%;

updating, in response to the selecting, the model catalog, wherein updating the model catalog comprises:

removing the best model and all data associated with the best model from the model catalog; and

ranking non-selected machine learning models of the model catalog based on the results of the selecting;

obtaining, after the updating, a plurality of hardware configurations and testing the best model on each hardware configuration within the plurality of hardware configurations to obtain configuration results, wherein the configuration results are the results of the pairing of the best model and each hardware configuration;

selecting, based on the configuration results and from the plurality of hardware configurations, a best hardware configuration; and

implementing, based on selecting the best hardware configuration, the best model using the best hardware configuration.

2 . The model selection method of claim 1 , wherein the training data comprises ground-truth data.

3 . A system comprising:

a memory; and

a processor coupled to the memory, wherein the processor is configured to execute a model selection method comprising:

receiving a request to train or validate a plurality of machine learning models, wherein the request comprising training data and one or more trigger conditions, wherein the trigger conditions specify;

model accuracy;

model latency;

model size;

amount of computing resources required for training; and

requirements and restrictions;

obtaining the machine learning models from a model catalog;

training the machine learning models using the training data to obtain results for each of the one or more trigger conditions;

selecting, based on the results of each of the one or more trigger conditions, on the restrictions, on the requirements, and from among the machine learning models, a best model to be pushed to production, wherein the requirements specify lower model latency should be prioritized over model accuracy and that model accuracy should be at least 90%;

updating, in response to the selecting, the model catalog, wherein updating the model catalog comprises:

removing the best model and all data associated with the best model from the model catalog; and

ranking non-selected machine learning models of the model catalog based on the results of the selecting;

obtaining, after the selecting, a plurality of hardware configurations and testing the best model on each hardware configuration within the plurality of hardware configurations to obtain configuration results, wherein the configuration results are the results of the pairing of the best model and each hardware configuration;

selecting, based on the configuration results and from the plurality of hardware configurations, a best hardware configuration; and

implementing, based on selecting the best hardware configuration, the best model using the best hardware configuration.

4 . The system of claim 3 , wherein the training data comprises ground-truth data.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 25, 2022
From: CHANDRASEKARAN, BALASUBRAMANIAN; WILSON, LUCAS AVERY; PATEL, DHARMESH M.
To: DELL PRODUCTS L.P.
Reel/Frame 059402/0487 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230306314A1 · Sep 28, 2023
References Cited (22)
US 8311967B1 · Lin · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 11004135B1 · Sandler et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11182691B1 · Zhang · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20170220407A1 · Estrada · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20190042887A1 · Nguyen et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190050754A1 · Assem Aly Salama · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190102700A1 · Babu et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190354809A1 · Ralhan · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190391956A1 · Kozhaya · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200234158A1 · Pai et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200257302A1 · Soltani Bozchalooi · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200387836A1 · Nasr-azadani et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210006472A1 · Khaspa et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210365813A1 · Nakano et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220405659A1 · Muthuswamy et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230133373A1 · Mcgonnell et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230169612A1 · Liguori et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
WO 2022072237A1 · 2022 [cited by applicant]
Andrew Or et al., Resource Elasticity in Distributed Deep Learning, 1-12, 2020 (12 pages). [cited by applicant]
Jia Guo et al., Predictive Resource Allocation with Deep Learning, 1-7, 2018 (7 pages). [cited by applicant]
Marcel Wagenlander et al., Spotnik Designing Distributed Machine Learning for Transient Cloud Resources, 1-8, 2020 (8 pages). [cited by applicant]
Yanghua Peng et al., Optimus An Efficient Dynamic Resource Scheduler for Deep Learning Clusters, 1-14, 2018 (14 pages). [cited by applicant]