Engineering a scalable Boolean matching based on EDA SaaS 2.0
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Software as a Service (SaaS) 1.0 signifcantly lowers the infrastructure and maintenance cost and increases the accessibility of the software by hosting software via the web. Compared with SaaS 1.0, SaaS 2.0 is more flexible since it leverages software tools from both server and client sides with closer interaction between them. The SaaS 2.0 paradigm provides new opportunities and challenges for EDA. In this paper, we take Boolean matching, one of the core sub algorithms in logic synthesis for field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), as a case study. We investigate the advantages and challenges of implementing a scalable EDA algorithm under SaaS 2.0 paradigm from a technical perspective. We propose SaaS-BM, a new Boolean matching algorithm customized to take full advantage of the cloud while addressing concerns such as security and the internet bandwidth limit. Extensive experiments are performed under a networked environment with concurrent accesses. Integrated into a post-mapping re-synthesis algorithm minimizing area, the proposed SaaS-BM is 863X times faster than state-of-the-art SAT-based Boolean matching with 0.5% area overhead. Compared with a recent Bloom Filter-based Boolean matching algorithm, our proposed SaaS-BM is 53X times faster on large circuits with no area overhead.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".