MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149110203 · doi:10.1109/tc.2009.62

Concurrent Error Detection in Finite-Field Arithmetic Operations Using Pipelined and Systolic Architectures

2009· article· en· W2149110203 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingFinite fieldFinite field arithmeticArithmeticField (mathematics)AlgorithmMathematicsCryptographyDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we consider detection of errors in polynomial, dual, and normal bases arithmetic operations. Error detection is performed by recomputing with the shifted operand method, while the operation unit is in use. This scheme is efficient for pipelined architectures, particularly systolic arrays. Additionally, one semisystolic multiplier for each of the polynomial, dual, type I, and type II optimal normal bases is presented. The results show that for having better or similar space and time overheads compared to a number of related previous work, the multipliers have generally a higher error-detection capability, e.g., the error-detection capability of the RESO-based scheme for single and multiple stuck-at faults in a polynomial basis multiplier is 100 percent. Finally, we also comment on how RESO can be used for concurrent error correction to deal with transient faults.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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