MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616855592 · doi:10.1145/3060403.3060429

An FPGA Coarse Grained Intermediate Fabric for Regular Expression Search

2017· article· en· W2616855592 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Luinaud, Yvon Savaria, J. M. Pierre Langlois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegular expressionComputer scienceTree traversalParallel computingThroughputField-programmable gate arrayString (physics)Network packetSet (abstract data type)Expression (computer science)Filter (signal processing)VirtexAlgorithmEmbedded systemOperating systemMathematicsProgramming languageComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep Packet Inspection systems such as Snort and Bro express complex rules with regular expressions. In Snort, the search of a regular expression is performed with a Non-deterministic Finite Automaton (NFA). Traversing an NFA sequentially with a CPU is not deterministic in time, and it can be very time consuming. The sequential traversal of an NFA with a CPU is not deterministic in time consequently it can be time consuming. A fully parallel NFA implemented in hardware can search all rules, but most of the time only a small part is active. Furthermore, a string filter determines the traversal of an NFA. This paper proposes an FPGA Intermediate Fabric that can efficiently search regular expressions. The architecture is configured for a specific NFA based on a partial match of a rule found by the string filter. It can thus support all rules from a set such as Snort, while significantly reduce compute resources and power con-sumption compared to a fully parallel implementation. Multiple parameters can be selected to find the best tradeoff between resource consumption and the number and types of supported expressions. This architecture was implemented on a Xilinx R XC7VX1140 Virtex-7. The reported implementation, can sustain up to 512 regular expressions, while requiring 2% of the slices and 16% of the BRAM resources, for a throughput of 200 million characters per second.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Packet Processing and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207