MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111207983 · doi:10.1109/async.2003.1199168

Efficient self-timed interfaces for crossing clock domains

2003· article· en· W2111207983 on OpenAlexaff
Anirban Chakraborty, Mark R. Greenstreet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHandshakingAsynchronous communicationComputer scienceFIFO (computing and electronics)Clock domain crossingSkewClock skewSynchronization (alternating current)Communication sourceDigital clock managerParallel computingChannel (broadcasting)Computer hardwareSynchronous circuitClock signalComputer networkTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing integration densities, large chip designs are commonly partitioned into multiple clock domains. While the computation within each individual domain may be synchronous, the interfaces between these domains often use asynchronous methods. One such approach is the STARI technique where a self-timed FIFO compensates for clock-skew between the sender and receiver. We present implementations of STARI where the FIFO consists of a single, handshaking stage. We start with the simplest case where the sender and receiver operate at exactly the same frequency with an unknown skew. We then generalize this design for links with clocks whose frequencies are rational multiples of each other, clocks whose frequencies are closely matched, and arbitrary clocks. We show that in each of these cases, the STARI interface can exploit the stability of typical clocks to achieve low latencies and negligible probabilities of synchronization failure using very simple hardware.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations123
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207