MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1796445194 · doi:10.1109/cicc.1994.379764

An overview of technology, architecture and CAD tools for programmable logic devices

2002· article· en· W1796445194 on OpenAlexaff
S. D. Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D IC and TSV technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgrammable Array LogicProgrammable logic deviceSimple programmable logic deviceProgrammable logic arrayComputer scienceErasable programmable logic deviceField-programmable gate arrayLogic synthesisLogic familyMacrocell arrayComputer architectureComplex programmable logic deviceLogic gateDigital electronicsEmbedded systemRegister-transfer levelElectronic circuitComputer hardwareElectrical engineeringEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before the advent of programmable logic devices (PLDs), most digital hardware designs included significant numbers of small-scale integrated (SSI) circuits that comprised basic logic gates and flip-flops. However, modem designs contain virtually none of these low-density parts, but instead are built from more complex devices that consist of an uncommitted array of logic gates and memory elements that can be configured by the user to implement different circuits. The term programmable logic device is not easy to define because the assortment of chips that fall within this broad category, namely any integrated circuit that is programmable by the end user and intended for implementing hardware, has grown very large over the past few years. In fact, even the relevant terminology has become nebulous because of rapid technology changes and the introduction of new innovative architectures. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of programmable logic devices in order to present the reader with a clear view of what is available on the market today. The fundamental technologies employed to manufacture PLDs are presented, after which for each of the three categories of chips, namely simple programmable logic devices (SPLDs), complex programmable logic devices (CPLDs), and field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), the paper describes the most significant architectural features, examples of applications, and the CAD tool design now typically used when implementing circuits.>

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.012

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D IC and TSV technologiesFrench-language works237,207