MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027069801 · doi:10.1145/2145694.2145730

Multi-ported memories for FPGAs via XOR

2012· article· en· W2027069801 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Eric LaForest, Ming G. Liu, Emma Rae Rapati, J. Gregory Steffan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPortingField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceLogic blockBlock (permutation group theory)XOR gateLookup tableExploitParallel computingEmbedded systemArithmeticComputer hardwareLogic gateAlgorithmOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-ported memories are challenging to implement with FPGAs since the block RAMs included in the fabric typically have only two ports. Any design that requires a memory with more than two ports must therefore be built out of logic elements or by combining multiple block RAMs. The recently-proposed Live Value Table (LVT) design provides a significant operating frequency improvement over conventional approaches. In this paper we present an alternative approach based on the XOR operation that provides multi-ported memories that use far less logic but more block RAMs than LVT designs, and are often smaller and faster for memories that are more than 512 entries deep. We show that (i) both designs can exploit multipumping to trade speed for area savings, (ii) that multipumped XOR designs are significantly smaller but moderately slower than their LVT counterparts, and (iii) that both the LVT and XOR approaches are valuable and useful in different situations, depending on the constraints and resource utilization of the enclosing 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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207