MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925360983 · doi:10.1109/fccm.2019.00037

Module-per-Object: A Human-Driven Methodology for C++-Based High-Level Synthesis Design

2019· article· en· W2925360983 on OpenAlexaff
Jeferson Santiago da Silva, François-Raymond Boyer, J. M. Pierre Langlois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer architecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-Level Synthesis (HLS) brings FPGAs to audiences previously unfamiliar to hardware design. However, achieving the highest Quality-of-Results (QoR) with HLS is still unattainable for most programmers. This requires detailed knowledge of FPGA architecture and hardware design in order to produce FPGA-friendly codes. Moreover, these codes are normally in conflict with best coding practices, which favor code reuse, modularity, and conciseness. To overcome these limitations, we propose Module-per-Object (MpO), a human-driven HLS design methodology intended for both hardware designers and software developers with limited FPGA expertise. MpO exploits modern C++ to raise the abstraction level while improving QoR, code readability and modularity. To guide HLS designers, we present the five characteristics of MpO classes. Each characteristic exploits the power of HLS-supported modern C++ features to build C++-based hardware modules. These characteristics lead to high-quality software descriptions and efficient hardware generation. We also present a use case of MpO, where we use C++ as the intermediate language for FPGA-targeted code generation from P4, a packet processing domain specific language. The MpO methodology is evaluated using three design experiments: a packet parser, a flow-based traffic manager, and a digital up-converter. Based on experiments, we show that MpO can be comparable to handwritten VHDL code while keeping a high abstraction level, humanreadable coding style and modularity. Compared to traditional C-based HLS design, MpO leads to more efficient circuit generation, both in terms of performance and resource utilization. Also, the MpO approach notably improves software quality, augmenting parameterization while eliminating the incidence of code duplication.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207