MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143626656 · doi:10.1109/iccd.2005.30

Asynchronous IC interconnect network design and implementation using a standard ASIC flow

2006· article· en· W2143626656 on OpenAlexaff
B.R. Quinton, Mark R. Greenstreet, Steven J. E. Wilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationComputer scienceApplication-specific integrated circuitInterconnectionDesign flowClock skewAsynchronous systemPipeline (software)Embedded systemIntegrated circuit designContext (archaeology)Latency (audio)Block (permutation group theory)SkewComputer architectureSynchronous circuitComputer networkJitterTelecommunicationsClock signal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of interconnect is becoming a significant challenge in modern IC design. Both synchronous and asynchronous strategies have been suggested to manage this problem. Creating a low skew clock tree for synchronous inter-block pipeline stages is a significant challenge. Asynchronous interconnect does not require a global clock, and therefore, it has a potential advantage in terms of design effort. This paper presents an asynchronous interconnect design that can be implemented using a standard ASIC flow. This design is considered in the context of a simple interconnect network. The results demonstrate that there is a region of the design space where the implementation provides an advantage over a synchronous interconnect. A detailed comparison of power, area and latency of the two strategies is also provided for a range of IC scenarios.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207