Execution time - area tradeoff in gausing residual load decoder: Integrated exploration of chaining based schedule and allocation in HLS for hardware accelerators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Design space exploration is an indispensable segment of High Level Synthesis (HLS) design of hardware accelerators. This paper presents a novel technique for Area-Execution time tradeoff using residual load decoding heuristics in genetic algorithms (GA) for integrated design space exploration (DSE) of scheduling and allocation. This approach is also able to resolve issues encountered during DSE of data paths for hardware accelerators, such as accuracy of the solution found, as well as the total exploration time during the process. The integrated solution found by the proposed approach satisfies the user specified constraints of hardware area and total execution time (not just latency), while at the same time offers a twofold unified solution of chaining based schedule and allocation. The cost function proposed in the genetic algorithm approach takes into account the functional units, multiplexers and demultiplexers needed during implementation. The proposed exploration system (ExpSys) was tested on a large number of benchmarks drawn from the literature for assessment of its efficiency. Results indicate an average improvement in Quality of Results (QoR) greater than 26% when compared to a recent well known GA based exploration method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".