Software-Based Selective Validation Techniques for Robust CGRAs Against Soft Errors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coarse-Grained Reconfigurable Architectures (CGRAs) are drawing significant attention since they promise both performances with parallelism and flexibility with reconfiguration. Soft errors (or transient faults) are becoming a serious design concern in embedded systems including CGRAs since the soft error rate is increasing exponentially as technology is scaling. A recently proposed software-based technique with TMR (Triple Modular Redundancy) implemented on CGRAs incurs extreme overheads in terms of runtime and energy consumption mainly due to expensive voting mechanisms for the outputs from the triplication of every operation. In this article, we propose selective validation mechanisms for efficient modular redundancy techniques in the datapaths on CGRAs. Our techniques selectively validate the results at synchronous operations rather than every operation in order to reduce the expensive performance overhead from the validation mechanism. We also present an optimization technique to further improve the runtime and the energy consumption by minimizing synchronous operations where a validating mechanism needs to be applied. Our experimental results demonstrate that our selective validation-based TMR technique with our optimization on CGRAs can improve the runtime by 41.0% and the energy consumption by 26.2% on average over benchmarks as compared to the recently proposed software-based TMR technique with the full validation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".