MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150281391 · doi:10.1109/cicc.1997.606687

Cluster-based logic blocks for FPGAs: area-efficiency vs. input sharing and size

2002· article· en· W2150281391 on OpenAlexaff
Vaughn Betz, Jonathan Rose

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayLogic blockComputer scienceLookup tableCluster (spacecraft)Key (lock)Parallel computingRouting (electronic design automation)Cluster sizeBlock (permutation group theory)Logic gateLogic synthesisLogic optimizationComputer architectureArithmeticComputer hardwareEmbedded systemAlgorithmMathematicsComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While modern FPGAs often contain clusters of 4-input lookup tables and flip flops, little is known about good choices for two key architectural parameters: the number of these basic logic elements (BLEs) in each cluster, and the total number of distinct inputs that the programmable routing can provide to each cluster. In this paper we explore the effect of these parameters on FPGA area-efficiency. We show that a cluster containing N BLEs needs only 2N+2 distinct inputs (vs. the 4N maximum) to achieve complete logic utilization. Secondly, we find that a cluster size of 4 is most area-efficient, and leads to an FPGA that is 5-10% more area-efficient than an FPGA based on a single BLE logic block.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations149
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207