MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035314967 · doi:10.1109/fccm48280.2020.00019

Exploring The Impact Of Switch Arity On Butterfly Fat Tree Fpga Nocs

2020· article· en· W3035314967 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Elmor Lang, Ziqiang Huang, Nachiket Kapre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArityComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayNetwork on a chipRouting (electronic design automation)Parallel computingDeadlockTree (set theory)CacheNetwork topologyEmbedded systemRouting tableTopology (electrical circuits)Computer networkDistributed computingRouting protocolEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overlay Networks-on-Chip (NoCs) for FPGAs based on the Butterfly-Fat Tree (BFT) topology with lightweight flow control deliver low LUT costs and features such as in-order delivery and livelock freedom. BFT NoCs make it possible to conFigure network bandwidth to match application requirements, by choosing switch types with different numbers of ports (arity) for the layers of the tree hierarchy. We increase the design space of BFT NoC configurations available to designers by constructing networks with larger arity-4 switches, in addition to the arity2 switches explored by previous works. When synthesized for the Xilinx UltraScale + VU9P FPGA, our proposed BFT NoCs consume 38-45% fewer LUTs and 33-50% smaller wiring lengths than arity-2 BFT NoCs with the same Rent parameter, in exchange for a reduction in maximum clock frequency in up to 25%. We simulate the operation of our proposed NoCs when routing various real-world workloads with 64 network clients, and show that they consistently achieve better Throughput / LUT cost ratios, when compared to arity-2 BFT NoCs with the same Rent parameter, with improvements of 15 to 120% depending on the benchmark and NoC topology.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.126 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInterconnection Networks and SystemsFrench-language works237,207