MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient Multiple-Precision Posit Multiplier

2021· article· en· W3158271463 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Zhang, Seok‐Bum Ko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplier (economics)Computer scienceComputationArchitectureComputer architectureParallel computingComputer engineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posit number system has been recently widely applied in many fields of applications. For different applications, the precision requirements are usually different. In addition, the transprecision computing paradigm, which is proposed for energy efficient computation, even requires different precision in each computation step. To support computations of various precision in a single hardware architecture, in this paper, a unified architecture of multiple-precision posit multiplier is proposed. The proposed posit multiplier supports the commonly used Posit(8, 0), Posit(16, 1), and Posit(32, 2) formats, where one Posit(32, 2), or two parallel Posit(16, 1), or four parallel Posit(8, 0) multiplications can be accomplished each time. Each module of the proposed posit multiplier is carefully tailored for resource sharing among three supported precision formats. Compared to the Posit(32, 2) multiplier, the proposed multiple- precision multiplier adds the support for parallel low-precision posit multiplications with only 12.8% more area and 15.4% more power. The proposed architecture can be used in posit-enabled general-purpose processor designs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNumerical Methods and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207