An Efficient Hardware Implementation of a SAT Problem Solver on FPGA
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
A hardware analyzer for the Boolean satisfiability problem using a complete algorithm was developed for an Alter a DE2-70 Cyclone II FPGA board. In one clock cycle, all implications are computed, variables are assigned and all clauses are evaluated in parallel. Backtracking is done by means of a hardware stack occupying minimal memory resources. No memory is required to hold the potentially gigantic problem specification as a VHDL package is used by the HDL compiler to simplify the circuit (by propagating constants). Run-time comparisons were made using instances from the DIMACS suite with MiniSAT, one of the most efficient software solvers, revealing accelerations of up to 6.66, as well as with other state-of-the-art hardware SAT solvers where accelerations of 2 orders of magnitude were observed. Our approach demonstrates a high level of flexibility and scalability as the generated circuits have a very small FPGA footprint. The largest problem tested has 317 variables, 1264 clauses for a total of 3670 literals and occupies 20.47% of the FPGA used. Projections regarding circuit frequency and FPGA footprint for larger problems are also deduced to show the scalability of the approach.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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