MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008284187 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2008.2006144

Functionally Linear Decomposition and Synthesis of Logic Circuits for FPGAs

2008· article· en· W2008284187 on OpenAlexaff
Tomasz Czajkowski, Stephen D. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXOR gateLogic synthesisLogic optimizationComputer scienceLogic familyScalabilityLogic gateLookup tableSet (abstract data type)Gaussian eliminationSequential logicAlgorithmBinary decision diagramElectronic circuitParallel computingGaussianProgramming languageEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel XOR-based logic synthesis approach called functionally linear decomposition and synthesis (FLDS). This approach decomposes a logic function to expose an XOR relationship by using Gaussian elimination. It is fundamentally different from the traditional approaches to this problem, which are based on the work of Ashenhurst and Curtis. FLDS utilizes binary decision diagrams to efficiently represent logic functions, making it fast and scalable. This technique was tested on a set of 99 MCNC benchmarks, mapping each design into a network of four input lookup tables. On the 25 of the benchmarks, which have been classified by previous researchers as XOR-based logic circuits, our approach provides significant area savings. In comparison to the leading logic synthesis tools, ABC and BDS-PGA 2.0, FLDS produces XOR-based circuits with 25.3% and 18.8% smaller area, respectively. The logic circuit depth is also improved by 7.7% and 14.5%, respectively.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207