MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166471827 · doi:10.1109/fpt.2008.4762418

An on-chip testbed that emulates runtime traffic and reduces design verification time for FPGA designs

2008· article· en· W2166471827 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne Chen, Lesley Shannon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReconfigurabilityTestbedComputer scienceEmbedded systemField-programmable gate arraySystem on a chipComputer architectureLeverage (statistics)Design processEngineeringWork in processComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) are commonly used as an inexpensive and flexible implementation platform for system-on-chip (SoC) designs. Now that FPGAs are large enough to implement SoCs, the reprogrammable fabric allows a different approach to the design process where on-chip computer aided design (CAD) tools can leverage reconfigurability to reduce design time. Statistics on commercial SoC designs suggest that 50% or more of design time may be spent on testing and verification due to design complexity. In previous work, we have proposed the systems integrating modules with predefined physical links (SIMPPL) SoC architectural framework to improve the design process. The defined communication links and protocols have been used to reduce integration time by an order of magnitude. In this paper, we propose an on-chip testbed that leverages both SIMPPL and an FPGApsilas reconfigurability to enable onchip testing and verification in real time using run time traffic patterns to reduce design time. The proposed testbed requires 331 LUTs and 224 flipflops for the Transmitter and 31 LUTs and 30 flipflops for the receiver. This testbed is able to generate a variety of possible run time traffic patterns that may be used to verify the operation of the CE.

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 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 score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207