MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151638498 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2010.2043593

IR-Drop Management in FPGAs

2010· article· en· W2151638498 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower network designField-programmable gate arrayRouting (electronic design automation)Computer scienceVoltage dropReduction (mathematics)GridCADDrop (telecommunication)VoltageElectronic engineeringEmbedded systemElectrical engineeringEngineeringMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents novel computer-aided design (CAD) techniques for mitigating IR-drops in field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). The proposed placement and routing relies on reducing the switching activities in local regions in the FPGA fabric to improve the profile of the supply voltage distribution. The proposed techniques reduce IR-drops and the variance of the supply voltage distribution across all the nodes in the power grid network. The proposed CAD techniques are efficient as they do not require solving the power grid model at every placement and routing iteration. A reduction of up to 53% in maximum IR-drop and up to 66% reduction in standard deviation of is obtained from the design techniques proposed in this paper with an average impact of 3% on circuit delay.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · 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