MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039377922 · doi:10.1109/reconfig.2012.6416789

Synchronized-transfer-level design methodology applied to hardware matrix multiplication

2012· article· en· W2039377922 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc-André Daigneault, Jean‐Pierre David

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerRegister-transfer levelHigh-level synthesisMatrix multiplicationSynchronization (alternating current)Computer hardwareMultiplication (music)Computer architectureParallel computingProgramming languageField-programmable gate arrayLogic synthesisLogic gateChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an effort to reduce the productivity gap separating hardware design and software programming practices, this paper presents the application of our synchronized-transfer-level hardware design methodology to the implementation of a hardware matrix multiplication accelerator. The methodology builds on a hardware description language for which the designer manages dynamic connections between sources and sinks that may not always be ready to send or receive data tokens. In addition to these connections, the designer can constrain the authorization of data transfers by the means of logical rules that make transfers dependant on each other. Combining both finite state machine and constraint programming paradigms, the featured description language enhances the ability to express and exploit low-level parallelism. A compiler automates the generation and the optimization of the synchronization logic, whose low-level complexity is thus hidden to the designer. Applied to the design of the pipelined matrix multiplication circuit, the proposed methodology leads to similar computing performances than the dedicated designs reported in the literature but within shorter design times (a single day), simpler source code and no need for advanced hardware design skills.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207