MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059674565 · doi:10.1109/fpt.2007.4439225

Memory Footprint Reduction for FPGA Routing Algorithms

2007· article· en· W2059674565 on OpenAlexaff
Scott Y. L. Chin, Steven J. E. Wilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)Field-programmable gate arrayMemory footprintReduction (mathematics)Parallel computingFootprintCompilerMemory managementAlgorithmEmbedded systemComputer hardwareOperating systemSemiconductor memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a technique to reduce the run-time memory footprint of FPGA routing algorithms. These algorithms require a representation of the physical routing resources and programmable connections on the device; this representation dominates the storage requirements of FPGA routers. We show that by taking advantage of the tile-based nature of FPGAs, we can reduce the amount of information that must be explicitly represented, leading to significant memory savings. To make our proposal concrete, we applied it to the routing algorithm in VPR and quantified the impact on run-time memory footprint, and place and route compile-time. We found that a memory reduction of 5X to 13X could be achieved at a routing runtime penalty of 2.26X and an overall place-and-route runtime penalty of 1.28X.

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)0.002
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207