MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166830851 · doi:10.1109/fccm.2011.49

Extending Force-Directed Scheduling with Explicit Parallel and Timed Constructs for High-Level Synthesis

2011· article· en· W2166830851 on OpenAlexaff
Rohit Sinha, Hiren Patel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingField-programmable gate arrayHigh-level synthesisScheduling (production processes)VHDLFormalism (music)RetimingEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work extends force-directed scheduling (FDS) to support specification constructs that express parallelism and timing behaviours. We select the FDS algorithm because it maximizes the amount of resource sharing, and it naturally supports constructs for parallelism. However, timed constructs are not supported. As a result, we propose timed FDS (TFDS) that optimizes over parallel, timed and untimed constructs. In doing so, we make the following four contributions: 1) we extend the definition of control data flow graphs (CDFGs) to define timed CDFGs (TCDFGs), 2) we define a scheduling algorithm for timed constructs called TIME, 3) we extend the definition of mobility used in FDS, and 4) we present optimizations for a composition of parallel, timed and untimed constructs to better aid FDS. We implement our extensions in a high-level synthesis framework based on the abstract state machine formalism, and we generate synthesizable VHDL. We experiment with several examples such as FIR, edge detector, and a differential equation solver, and target them onto an Altera DE2 FPGA. Some of these experiments show improvements of up to 52% in circuit area when compared to their unoptimized counterparts.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.244
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207