Power complexity of multiplexer-based optoelectronic crossbar switches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integration of thousands of optical input/output (I/O) devices and large electronic crossbar switching elements onto a single optoelectronic integrated circuit (IC) can place stringent power demands on the CMOS substrates. Currently, there is no sufficiently general analytic methodology for power analysis and power reduction of large-scale crossbar switching systems. An analysis of the power complexity of single-chip optoelectronic switches is presented, assuming the classic broadcast-and-select crossbar architecture. The analysis yields the distribution of power dissipation and allows for design optimization. Both unpipelined and pipelined designs are analyzed, and a technique to reduce power dissipation significantly is proposed. The design of a 5.12 Tbit single-chip optoelectronic switch using 0.18-/spl mu/m CMOS technology is illustrated. The pipelined switch design occupies < 70 mm/sup 2/ of CMOS area, and consumes <80 W of power, which compares favorably to the power required in electrical crossbar switches of equivalent capacity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".