Force-Directed Methods for Generic Placement
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the implementation of a wire length-driven force-directed placer named FDP for generic placement. Specifically, it describes efficient force computation for cell spreading, numerical instabilities during force-directed placement, a means to avoid instabilities, and metrics for proper assessment of cell distribution throughout the placement region. It demonstrates that one of the greatest impediments to achieving high-quality placements using a force-directed placer lies in the large amount of cell overlap present in initial placements. This overlap makes the determination of cell ordering difficult and can lead to the inadvertent separation of highly connected cells. It is shown that median improvement and multilevel clustering improve cell ordering and aid in wire length minimization. Numerical results are presented for both standard cell and mixed-size placement problems. For standard cell problems, the tool generates placements that are, on average, 3% better than Capo9.0, but 5% worse than FengShui2.6. For mixed-size problems, FDP generated placements that are, on average, 2%-5% better than Capo9.0 and -5%--2% better than Fengshui2.6, depending on the presence (or absence) of pin offsets. Run times for FDP are higher than both Capo9.0 and FengShu2.6, although reasonable
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it