MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012999122 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2007.891362

FPGA PLB Architecture Evaluation and Area Optimization Techniques Using Boolean Satisfiability

2007· article· en· W2012999122 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceBoolean satisfiability problemComputer architectureBoolean functionLogic blockFlexibility (engineering)Block (permutation group theory)ArchitectureLogic synthesisProgrammable logic deviceParallel computingEmbedded systemComputer engineeringTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmLogic gateMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) logic synthesis technique based upon Boolean satisfiability. This paper shows how to map any Boolean function into an arbitrary programmable logic block (PLB) architecture without any custom decomposition techniques. The authors illustrate several useful applications of this technique by showing how this technique can be used for architecture evaluation and area optimization. When evaluating the FPGA architecture, the authors focus on the basic building block of the FPGA, which they refer to as PLB. In order to illustrate the flexibility of their evaluation framework, several unrelated PLB architectures are evaluated in an automated fashion. Furthermore, the authors show that using their technique is able to reduce FPGA resource usage by 27% on average in common subcircuits found in digital design.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.215 · 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