MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477896399 · doi:10.1109/asicon.2015.7516961

DPALS: A dynamic programming-based algorithm for two-level approximate logic synthesis

2015· article· en· W2477896399 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Zou, Weikang Qian, Jie Han

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsComputer scienceReduction (mathematics)Literal (mathematical logic)AdderAlgorithmLogic synthesisSet (abstract data type)Boolean functionConstraint (computer-aided design)Power–delay productLogic optimizationFunction (biology)Word error rateLogic gateMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximate circuit design is an emerging paradigm in which a designer deliberately changes the specified Boolean function to reduce area, delay, and/or power consumption of a circuit. This paper focuses on the synthesis of approximate logic circuits (or ALS) under a given error constraint. In particular, we consider ALS for a two-level design under an error rate constraint. A dynamic programming-based algorithm is proposed to find a nearly optimal approximate function by identifying the most promising set of cubes to be added to the on-set of the original function. Then, an off-the-shelf two-level logic synthesis tool is applied to further optimize the sum-of-product (SOP) expression. The experimental results show that the literal reduction is close to the optimal solution when the error rate constraint is tight and that more than 50% literal reduction is achieved for error rate below 0.8% for an 8-bit adder and a square root circuit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207