Bibliographic record
Abstract
In earlier technology nodes, FPGAs had low power consumption compared to other compute chips such as CPUs and GPUs. However, in the 14nm technology node, FPGAs are consuming unprecedented power in the 100+W range, making power consumption a pressing concern. To reduce FPGA power consumption, several researchers have proposed deploying dynamic voltage scaling. While the previously proposed solutions show promising results, they have difficulty guaranteeing safe operation at reduced voltages for applications that use the FPGA hard blocks. In this work, we present the first DVS solution that is able to fully handle FPGA applications that use BRAMs. Our solution not only robustly tests the soft logic component of the application but also tests all components connected to the BRAMs. We extend a previously proposed CAD tool, FRoC, to automatically generate calibration bitstreams that are used to measure the application’s critical path delays on silicon. The calibration bitstreams also include testers that ensure all used SRAM cells operate safely while scaling V dd . We experimentally show that using our DVS solution we can save 32% of the total power consumed by a discrete Fourier transform application running with the fixed nominal supply voltage and clocked at the F max reported by static timing analysis.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.046 |
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".