MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040548413 · doi:10.1109/mwscas.2010.5548744

Dynamic Programming Addition Optimization approach for large size multipliers in FPGAs

2010· article· en· W2040548413 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperandField-programmable gate arrayLookup tableComputer scienceParallel computingDynamic programmingReconfigurable computingAdderComputer hardwareEmbedded systemAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, Dynamic Programming Addition Optimization (DPAO) approach is proposed to realize large size multipliers targeting FPGA devices. The large size operands of the multipliers are decomposed and multiplied to generate segmented partial products. Each segmented operation is processed by embedded blocks in FPGAs, and then multi-level addition is performed to obtain the final result. The objective of the DPAO technique is to achieve highly optimized addition with delay-area as a cost function. The implementation results are compared to Standard approach and to Karatsuba-Ofman multipliers targeting Xilinx' and Altera's FPGAs. When using Altera's FPGAs, the average improvement in speed is 5.3% and LUT savings is 28.8% for operands ranging from 40 bits to 112 bits. Improvements in Xilinx implementation are limited to operand sizes of more than 70 bits.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207