MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234875748 · doi:10.1109/dac.1992.227777

TEMPT: technology mapping for the exploration of FPGA architectures with hard-wired connections

2003· article· en· W4234875748 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Chung, Jonathan Rose

Bibliographic record

Venue[1992] Proceedings 29th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetlistField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Parallel computingEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TEMPT is a technology mapping algorithm aimed at exploring field-programmable gate array (FPGA) architectures with hard-wired connections. TEMPT maps a network of basic blocks to a netlist of hard-wired logic blocks (HLBs), in which each HLB consists of several basic hard-wire blocks connected in an arbitrary tree topology, and optimizes either speed or area. TEMPT is as effective as the Xilinx 4000 CLB mapper, PPR, when minimizing CLBs to implement a set of MCNC benchmarks. Using TEMPT it was shown empirically that many HLBs were significantly faster than FPGAs without hard-wired links. Several HLBs were demonstrated that exhibited superior logic density to the Xilinx 4000 CLB.>

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue[1992] Proceedings 29th ACM/IEEE Design Automation ConferenceSame topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207