MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904342476 · doi:10.1109/fpl.2018.00068

Latency Insensitive Design Styles for FPGAs

2018· article· en· W2904342476 on OpenAlexaff
Mustafa Abbas, Vaughn Betz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatency (audio)Computer scienceField-programmable gate arrayInterconnectionEmbedded systemStratixCritical path methodComputer architectureLogic synthesisPipeline (software)Parallel computingLogic gateEngineeringComputer networkOperating systemTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long distance interconnect delays are not scaling well with process technology, thereby leading to long routes strongly impacting the critical path of large FPGA designs. This forces the designer to pipeline long connections, which necessitates time consuming logic redesign in traditional latency-sensitive systems. Latency-insensitive design (LID) is an increasingly attractive alternative as the typical latency of long distance interconnect grows, since LID decouples the design of the interconnect from that of the computational modules. By doing so, LID simplifies timing closure, improves forward compatibility (migration of systems to future FPGAs) and makes automated system-level pipelining feasible. Modern FPGAs, such as Stratix 10 which includes pipelined interconnect, make it difficult to use traditional LID solutions without significant area and frequency overhead. We present two LID styles that are more suitable for FPGAs and compare them to traditional LID. Our best system gained 2x area efficiency and 18% speed efficiency over traditional LID. Additionally, our designs come at a minimal speed overhead of only 3% compared to that of a latency-sensitive design.

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)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207