MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141723551 · doi:10.1109/asap.2007.4429954

Evaluation of a High-Level-Language Methodology for High-Performance Reconfigurable Computers

2007· article· en· W2141723551 on OpenAlexaff
Jahyun J. Koo, D. Fernández, A Haddad, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeedupComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayVerilogHigh-level programming languageParallel computingHardware description languageVHDLFloating pointReconfigurable computingComputer architectureHigh-level synthesisProgramming paradigmComputer hardwareProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-performance reconfigurable computers (HPRCs) consisting of CPUs with application-specific FPGA accelerators traditionally use a low-level hardware-description language such as VHDL or Verilog to program the FP-GAs. The complexity of hardware design methodologies for FPGAs requires specialist engineering knowledge and presents a significant barrier to entry for scientific users with only a software background. Recently, a number of High-Level Languages (HLLs) for programming FPGAs have emerged that aim to lower this barrier and abstract away hardware-dependent details. This paper presents the results of a study on implementing hardware accelerators using the Mitrion-C HLL. The implementation of two floating-point scientific kernels: dense matrix-vector multiplication (DMVM) and the computation of spherical boundary conditions in molecular dynamics (SB) are described. We describe optimizations that are essential for taking advantage of both the features of the HLL and the underlying HPRC hardware and libraries. Scaling of the algorithms to multiple FPGAs is also investigated. With four FPGAs, 80 times speedup over an Itanium 2 CPU was achieved for the DMVM, while a 26 times speedup was achieved for SB.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207