A Comparative Study of Parallel Prefix Adders in FPGA Implementation of EAC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several regular parallel trees have been proposed over the years to optimize logic depth, area, fan-out and interconnect count for logic circuits. In this paper, we propose a comparative study of different parallel prefix trees used in the design of a new end-around carry (EAC) adder targeting FPGA technology. This new adder is based on the fast 128-bit binary floating-point EAC adder which has been implemented in the IBM POWER6 microprocessor's fused multiply-add unit. The parallel prefix tree implemented on the IBM's EAC adder is a Kogge-Stone tree which has been chosen for its high performance and its low power consumption. Our comparative study highlights the main performance differences among fourteen different architecture configurations when targeting an FPGA EAC adder design. We focus on the area requirements and the critical path delay of these designs. Our experimental results show that there is one architecture configuration with the lower area requirement and the higher performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".