MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954748826 · doi:10.1109/tc.2019.2926275

Design and Analysis of Area and Power Efficient Approximate Booth Multipliers

2019· article· en· W2954748826 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMultiplier (economics)Booth's multiplication algorithmComputer scienceArithmeticAlgorithmApproximation errorAdderMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximate computing is an emerging technique in which power-efficient circuits are designed with reduced complexity in exchange for some loss in accuracy. Such circuits are suitable for applications in which high accuracy is not a strict requirement. Radix-4 modified Booth encoding is a popular multiplication algorithm which reduces the size of the partial product array by half. In this paper, three Approximate Booth Multiplier Models (ABM-M1, ABM-M2, and ABM-M3) are proposed in which approximate computing is applied to the radix-4 modified Booth algorithm. Each of the three designs features a unique approximation technique that involves both reducing the logic complexity of the Booth partial product generator and modifying the method of partial product accumulation. The proposed approximate multipliers are demonstrated to have better performance than existing approximate Booth multipliers in terms of accuracy and power. Compared to the exact Booth multiplier, ABM-M1 achieves up to a 23 percent reduction in area and 15 percent reduction in power with a Mean Relative Error Distance (MRED) value of 7:9 × 10 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">-4</sup> . ABM-M2 has area and power savings of up to 51 and 46 percent respectively with a MRED of 2:7 × 10 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">-2</sup> . ABM-M3 has area savings of up to 56 percent and power savings of up to 46 percent with a MRED of 3:4 × 10 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">-3</sup> . The proposed designs are compared with the state-of-the-art existing multipliers and are found to outperform them in terms of area and power savings while maintaining high accuracy. The performance of the proposed designs are demonstrated using image transformation, matrix multiplication, and Finite Impulse Response (FIR) filtering 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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