GPlace3.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimizing for routability during FPGA placement is becoming increasingly important, as failure to spread and resolve congestion hotspots throughout the chip, especially in the case of large designs, may result in placements that either cannot be routed or that require the router to work excessively hard to obtain success. In this article, we introduce a new, analytic routability-aware placement algorithm for Xilinx UltraScale FPGA architectures. The proposed algorithm, called GPlace3.0, seeks to optimize both wirelength and routability. Our work contains several unique features including a novel window-based procedure for satisfying legality constraints in lieu of packing, an accurate congestion estimation method based on modifications to the pathfinder global router, and a novel detailed placement algorithm that optimizes both wirelength and external pin count. Experimental results show that compared to the top three winners at the recent ISPD’16 FPGA placement contest, GPlace3.0 is able to achieve (on average) a 7.53%, 15.15%, and 33.50% reduction in routed wirelength, respectively, while requiring less overall runtime. As well, an additional 360 benchmarks were provided directly from Xilinx Inc. These benchmarks were used to compare GPlace3.0 to the most recently improved versions of the first- and second-place contest winners. Subsequent experimental results show that GPlace3.0 is able to outperform the improved placers in a variety of areas including number of best solutions found, fewest number of benchmarks that cannot be routed, runtime required to perform placement, and runtime required to perform routing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.012 |
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".