MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083553720 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2010.2049154

Optimization of Imprecise Circuits Represented by Taylor Series and Real-Valued Polynomials

2010· article· en· W2083553720 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaylor seriesSeries (stratigraphy)Arbitrary-precision arithmeticAlgorithmFloating pointInterval arithmeticFunction (biology)ImplementationRepresentation (politics)MathematicsFixed-point arithmeticPoint (geometry)Double-precision floating-point formatSelection (genetic algorithm)Upper and lower boundsBranch and boundMathematical optimizationComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arithmetic circuits in general do not match specifications exactly, leading to different implementations within allowed imprecision. We present a technique to search for the least expensive fixed-point implementations for a given error bound. The method is practical in real applications and overcomes traditional precision analysis pessimism, as it allows simultaneous selection of multiple word lengths and even some function approximation, primarily based on Taylor series. Starting from real-valued representation, such as Taylor series, we rely on arithmetic transform to explore maximum imprecision by a branch-and-bound search algorithm to investigate imprecision. We also adopt a new tight-bound interval scheme, and derive a precision optimization algorithm that explores multiple precision parameters to get an implementation with smallest area cost.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.233 · 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