MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252663327 · doi:10.7763/ijiet.2011.v1.71

A Processor Design Course Project: Creating Soft-Core MIPS Processor Using Step-by-Step Components’ Integration Approach

2011· article· en· W4252663327 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Elkateeb

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information and Education Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCourse (navigation)Core (optical fiber)Multi-core processorComputer architectureParallel computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design and implementation of a soft-core MIPS processor using field-programmable gate array (FPGA) technology will be addressed in this paper.Teaching processor architecture and design is considered the key element of the student learning in the undergraduate Computer Engineering program; as such, this project was developed to enrich students' experience in this field.This paper presents a practical introduction to soft-core processor design through the use of step-by-step integrating of the processor's components.Students implemented their processors using Xilinx ISE design tools and downloaded their designs to Xilinx ML 501 FPGA boards, which used Xilinx Virtex 5 chips.A designed and developed soft-core processor provided students with a starting point for applying their designed processors in follow-up courses such as Embedded Systems and Senior Design Project.Students' assessment of the soft-core processor design was analyzed, which indicated that they are confident in confronting the next step of constructing advanced processor architecture.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information and Education TechnologySame topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207