MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793637056 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2018.2801222

Automatic Application-Specific Calibration to Enable Dynamic Voltage Scaling in FPGAs

2018· article· en· W2793637056 on OpenAlexafffund
Ibrahim Ahmed, Shuze Zhao, Olivier Trescases, Vaughn Betz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of ExcellenceIntel Corporation
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceCalibrationProcess (computing)Computer hardwareEmbedded systemLookup tableScalingPower (physics)Operating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic voltage scaling (DVS) is one of the most effective ways to reduce integrated circuit power. However, the programmability of field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) means that the critical paths depend on the application configured into the FPGA and this makes DVS more difficult. We propose a DVS technique that is able to determine the minimum safe Vddof any application for each FPGA chip. For each application, we create multiple calibration bit-streams that are used to generate a calibration table (CT), which stores the actual failing points of that application on a specific FPGA, under various operating conditions. This CT is used to scale Vddwhile the application is running to guarantee safe operation with minimal power consumption. We develop an automated tool (FRoC) that ensures a fast-robust-calibration of the FPGA to any application using it. FRoC makes the calibration process invisible to FPGA users, does not add any extra manual steps to the design process, and uses novel algorithms to minimize the extra flash storage requirements for calibration. Our results show that across a large suite of benchmarks the calibration process requires a geomean of less than four bit-streams and our DVS technique achieves a 33% total power reduction on two large applications.

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)0.005
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207