MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234268053 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14644968

Power Efficient Rapid Design Space Exploration of Integrated Scheduling and Module Selection in High Level Synthesis

2021· preprint· en· W4234268053 on OpenAlexaff
Pallabi Sarkar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Mathematical optimizationHigh-level synthesisPower consumptionDistributed computingReal-time computingAlgorithmPower (physics)MathematicsEmbedded systemField-programmable gate array

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High level Synthesis (HLS) or Electronic System Level (ESL) synthesis requires scheduling algorithms that have strong capability to reach optimal/near-optimal solutions with significant rapidity and greater accuracy. A novel power efficient scheduling approach using ‘PI’ method has been presented in this thesis that reduces the final power consumption of the solution at the expenditure of minimal latency clock cycles. The proposed scheduling approach is based on ‘Priority indicator (PI)’ metric and ‘Intersect Matrix’ topology methods that have a tendency to escape local optimal solutions and thereby reach global solutions. Application of the proposed approach results in even distribution of allocated hardware functional units thereby yielding power efficient scheduling solutions. The two main novel and significant aspects of the thesis are: a) Introduction of ‘Intersect Matrix’ topology with its associated algorithm which is used to check for precedence violation during scheduling b) Introduction of PI method using Priority indicator metric that assists in choosing the highest priority node during each iteration of the scheduling optimization process. Comparative analysis of the proposed approach has been done with an existing design space exploration method for qualitative assessment using proposed ‘Quality Cost Factor (Q- metric)’. This Q-metric is a combination of latency and power consumption values for the solution found, which dictates the quality of the final solutions found in terms of cost for both the proposed and existing approaches. An average improvement of approximately 12 % in quality of final solution and average reduction of 59 % in runtime has been achieved by the proposed approach compared to a current scheduling approach for the DSP benchmarks.

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)0.002
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 score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207