MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160865949 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2021.3079126

Algorithm Selection Framework for Legalization Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning

2021· article· en· W3160865949 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 Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsLegalizationConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceTransfer of learningArtificial intelligenceRouting (electronic design automation)Selection (genetic algorithm)Artificial neural networkDeep learningAlgorithmMachine learningDisplacement (psychology)Embedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning (ML) models have been used to improve the quality of different physical design steps, such as timing analysis, clock tree synthesis, and routing. However, so far very few works have addressed the problem of algorithm selection during physical design, which can drastically reduce the computational effort of some steps. This work proposes a legalization algorithm selection framework using deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs). To extract features, we used snapshots of circuit placements and used transfer learning to train the models using pretrained weights of the Squeezenet architecture. By doing so, we can greatly reduce the training time and required data even though the pretrained weights come from a different problem. We performed extensive experimental analysis of ML models, providing details on how we chose the parameters of our model, such as CNN architecture, learning rate, and number of epochs. We evaluated the proposed framework by training a model to select between different legalization algorithms according to cell displacement and wirelength variation. The trained models achieved an average <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$F$ </tex-math></inline-formula> -score of 0.98 when predicting cell displacement and 0.83 when predicting wirelength variation. When integrated into the physical design flow, the cell displacement model achieved the best results on 15 out of 16 designs, while the wirelength variation model achieved that for 10 out of 16 designs, being better than any individual legalization algorithm. Finally, using the proposed ML model for algorithm selection resulted in a speedup of up to <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$10\times $ </tex-math></inline-formula> compared to running all the algorithms separately.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.210 · 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