MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006437160 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2002.06998

RapidLayout: Fast Hard Block Placement of FPGA-optimized Systolic Arrays using Evolutionary Algorithms

2020· preprint· en· W3006437160 on OpenAlexafffund
Niansong Zhang, Xiang Chen, Nachiket Kapre

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of WaterlooNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsSun Yat-sen UniversityCMC Microsystems
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceParallel computingSystolic arrayPlacementAlgorithmMinimum bounding boxBlock (permutation group theory)Routing (electronic design automation)Simulated annealingFloorplanComputer hardwareEmbedded systemVery-large-scale integrationPhysical designCircuit designMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolutionary algorithms can outperform conventional placement algorithms such as simulated annealing, analytical placement as well as manual placement on metrics such as runtime, wirelength, pipelining cost, and clock frequency when mapping FPGA hard block intensive designs such as systolic arrays on Xilinx UltraScale+ FPGAs. For certain hard-block intensive, systolic array accelerator designs, the commercial-grade Xilinx Vivado CAD tool is unable to provide a legal routing solution without tedious manual placement constraints. Instead, we formulate an automatic FPGA placement algorithm for these hard blocks as a multi-objective optimization problem that targets wirelength squared and maximum bounding box size metrics. We build an end-to-end placement and routing flow called RapidLayout using the Xilinx RapidWright framework. RapidLayout runs 5-6$\times$ faster than Vivado with manual constraints and eliminates the weeks-long effort to generate placement constraints manually for the hard blocks. We also perform automated post-placement pipelining of the long wires inside each convolution block to target 650MHz URAM-limited operation. RapidLayout outperforms (1) the simulated annealer in VPR by 33% in runtime, 1.9-2.4$\times$ in wirelength, and 3-4$\times$ in bounding box size, while also (2) beating the analytical placer UTPlaceF by 9.3$\times$ in runtime, 1.8-2.2$\times$ in wirelength, and 2-2.7$\times$ in bounding box size. We employ transfer learning from a base FPGA device to speed-up placement optimization for similar FPGA devices in the UltraScale+ family by 11-14$\times$ than learning the placements from scratch.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.110 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207