MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598631327 · doi:10.1145/2990299.2990305

Automatic detection and elision of reset sub-circuits

2016· article· en· W2598631327 on OpenAlexaff
Panagiotis Patros, Kenneth B. Kent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVerilogComputer scienceReset (finance)Field-programmable gate arrayRouting (electronic design automation)Electronic circuitEmbedded systemHardware description languageApplication-specific integrated circuitComputer hardwareElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electronic circuits are too complex to be designed by hand so hardware languages, like Verilog, and Computer Aided Design (CAD) tools are used for these purposes. Two main types of circuits are Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs) and Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs). ASICs require a reset sub-circuit to initialize their state; however, such a procedure is not necessary for FPGAs that support power-on reset. We propose and evaluate a tool that automatically detects and elides reset sub-circuits as part of the Verilog-to-Routing (VTR) CAD flow and in particular Odin II. Also, our tool can be used to decide if a reset sub-circuit has been properly implemented and can point towards memory components that have not been initialized. Such a tool is the first to our knowledge. Our tests with the VTR Verilog benchmarks and other Verilog circuits showed significant reductions in resource consumption on the target FPGAs as much as 25.9% shorter critical path, 90.39% shorter maximum net, 62.84% fewer used logic blocks and 30.87% fewer used routing elements. Also, our approach yielded significant reductions in the execution time of the placement-and-routing algorithm for the elided circuits that were as high as 4.5 times faster VPR execution and 3.35 times faster overall VTR flow execution.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207