MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125630634 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2006.883926

Generalized Power-Delay Metrics in Deep Submicron CMOS Designs

2007· article· en· W2125630634 on OpenAlexaff
Dipanjan Sengupta, Resve Saleh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCMOSMetric (unit)Set (abstract data type)Computer sciencePower (physics)Product (mathematics)AlgorithmElectrical engineeringMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, designers have been using the energy-delay product as a metric of goodness for CMOS designs due to certain perceived shortcomings of the more traditional power-delay product. As the industry moves to 90-nm technology with higher leakage currents, it is appropriate to revisit existing design metrics. In this paper, a reevaluation of the metrics is carried out, and a generalized set of metrics is proposed. Supply voltage (VDD) and threshold voltage (VT) scaling are two popular approaches to power reduction. As such, the effects on power and frequency are analyzed, and the feasible region of operation is identified in the VDDversus VTplane. A fundamental relationship is established between the optimal operating points and the generalized design metrics. The initial findings also indicate that some designs may have a higher percentage of leakage than expected to achieve overall power reduction, running somewhat counter to conventional wisdom

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations26
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207