NoC Architectures for Silicon Interposer Systems: Why Pay for more Wires when you Can Get them (from your interposer) for Free?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Silicon interposer technology ("2.5D" stacking) enables the integration of multiple memory stacks with a processor chip, thereby greatly increasing in-package memory capacity while largely avoiding the thermal challenges of 3D stacking DRAM on the processor. Systems employing interposers for memory integration use the interposer to provide point-to-point interconnects between chips. However, these interconnects only utilize a fraction of the interposer's overall routing capacity, and in this work we explore how to take advantage of this otherwise unused resource. We describe a general approach for extending the architecture of a network-on-chip (NoC) to better exploit the additional routing resources of the silicon interposer. We propose an asymmetric organization that distributes the NoC across both a multi-core chip and the interposer, where each sub-network is different from the other in terms of the traffic types, topologies, the use or non-use of concentration, direct vs. Indirect network organizations, and other network attributes. Through experimental evaluation, we show that exploiting the otherwise unutilized routing resources of the interposer can lead to significantly better performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it