MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134606315 · doi:10.1109/cicc.1991.164058

An efficient eigenvector-node interchange approach for finding netlist partitions

2002· article· en· W2134606315 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Vannelli, Scott Hadley, Brian L. Mark

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetlistHeuristicsEigenvalues and eigenvectorsComputer scienceNode (physics)Partition (number theory)Benchmark (surveying)Theoretical computer scienceHeuristicAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical optimizationCombinatoricsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fast eigenvector technique for obtaining good initial node partitions of netlists for use in interchange heuristics is described. The method is based on approximating the netlist or hypergraph by a weighted graph G and applying the eigenvector technique of E.R. Barnes (1982) to partition G and k blocks of fixed module size. An efficient generalization of the Fiduccia-Mattheyses node-interchange heuristic is developed to further reduce the number of nets connecting k blocks. This node-interchange heuristic is tested on the one resulting netlist partition obtained by this eigenvector approach on a variety of small to large sized benchmark netlist partitioning problems (200 to 12000 modules and nets). The test results show that this eigenvector-node-interchange approach yields netlist partitions that are competitive with the best netlist partitions obtained by using node-interchange heuristics alone on many random initial netlist partitions. The running time of this method is a small fraction of that previous node-interchange methods.>

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207