A detailed power model for field-programmable gate arrays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Power has become a critical issue for field-programmable gate array (FPGA) vendors. Understanding the power dissipation within FPGAs is the first step in developing power-efficient architectures and computer-aided design (CAD) tools for FPGAs. This article describes a detailed and flexible power model which has been integrated in the widely used Versatile Place and Route (VPR) CAD tool. This power model estimates the dynamic, short-circuit, and leakage power consumed by FPGAs. It is the first flexible power model developed to evaluate architectural tradeoffs and the efficiency of power-aware CAD tools for a variety of FPGA architectures, and is freely available for noncommercial use. The model is flexible, in that it can estimate the power for a wide variety of FPGA architectures, and it is fast, in that it does not require extensive simulation, meaning it can be used to explore a large architectural space. We show how the model can be used to investigate the impact of various architectural parameters on the energy consumed by the FPGA, focusing on the segment length, switch block topology, lookuptable size, and cluster size.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".