MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608848694 · doi:10.1109/iscas.1995.521446

Floorplanning with datapath optimization

2002· article· en· W1608848694 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelhakim Safir, Baher Haroun, K. Thulasiraman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDatapathFloorplanComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)High-level synthesisScheduleNetwork topologyParallel computingPlacementCritical path methodPath (computing)Field-programmable gate arrayMathematical optimizationPhysical designEmbedded systemEngineeringCircuit designMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a floorplanner for datapath with the capability of re-allocating data storage for minimizing the interconnect area and critical path delay without altering the number of functional units and the schedule. The tool has combined two novel approaches: 1-A placement and routing model to handle different architectural topologies (mux. and/or bus based) suitable for FPGA's. 2-An efficient formulation for the binding of register/interconnect and combined floorplanning. The complexity of the architectural and floorplanning model, and of the cost function, have led us to the use of a stochastic optimization process. The running time of the whole process indicates the viability of the method. We show through various examples how the floorplanner improves the area and critical path delay of the datapath compared to a plain floorplanner. The improvement is about 20% for the critical path delay when this objective is a stringent constraint.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.146 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207