MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102704825 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2004.828124

Area Optimization of Delay-Optimized Structures Using Intrinsic Constraint Graphs

2004· article· en· W2102704825 on OpenAlexaff
O. Peyran, Zhigang Zeng, W. Zhuang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSizingBlock (permutation group theory)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationRouting (electronic design automation)Similarity (geometry)Constraint (computer-aided design)Optimization problemRelation (database)AlgorithmMathematicsData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a new methodology for structure optimization of block-based design. Instead of merging area and delay criteria, we segregate them into two independent steps. Solutions optimized for delay in the first step are optimized for area with a block-sizing algorithm in the second step. The fully optimized solutions eventually return to the first optimization step, if the user constraints are not met, using a structure-extraction module. A condition to this approach is that the area optimization phase does not alter the quality reached during delay optimization. We propose a framework for area optimization of delay-optimized structures based on structure similarities. We present a new model to represent block placements that share the same qualities for global routing. Using this model, we formally define the relation of similarity and exhibit several properties and theorems to validate our approach. The modules composing the area optimization phase are presented and experimental results confirm the validity of our methodology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207