MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114670894 · doi:10.1109/aina.2008.97

Parallel Computation of Similarity Measures Using an FPGA-Based Processor Array

2008· article· en· W2114670894 on OpenAlexaff
Darshika G. Perera, Kin Fun Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAlgorithms and Data Compression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayComputationSimilarity (geometry)Parallel computingComputer engineeringComputer architectureVector processorSoftwareSet (abstract data type)Data miningComputer hardwareAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An enormous amount of data needs to be processed in many data mining applications. In addition to algorithmic development, hardware support is imperative to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of these applications. We are investigating various hardware architectural design techniques and methodologies to support data mining at the chip level. In this work, we focus on the design of an FPGA-based processor array for the computation of similarity matrix, a commonly used data structure to represent the similarity among a set of feature vectors, with each matrix element representing the computed similarity measure between two vectors. An algorithm is developed to assign computation efficiently to the array of processing elements. Theoretical performance metrics are derived and compared to the experimental results. Performance gains using the processor array over software implementations are also presented and discussed.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations31
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAlgorithms and Data CompressionFrench-language works237,207