MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255023136 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14647368

Parallel Implementation of Non-slicing Floorplans with MPI and OpenMP

2021· preprint· en· W4255023136 on OpenAlexaff
Oluvaseun Owojaiye

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallel computingComputer scienceFloorplanBenchmark (surveying)MultiprocessingVery-large-scale integrationSlicingComputationComputer architectureEmbedded systemAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancement in technology has brought considerable improvement to processor design and now manufacturers design multiple processors on a single chip. Supercomputers today consists of cluster of interconnected nodes that collaborate together to solve complex and advanced computation problems. Message Passing Interface and Open Multiprocessing are the popularly used programming models to optimize sequential codes by parallelizing them on the different multiprocessor architecture that exist today. In this thesis, we parallelize the non-slicing floorplan algorithm based on Multilevel Floorplanning/placement of large scale modules using B*tree (MB*tree) with MPI and OpenMP on distributed and shared memory architectures respectively. In VLSI (Very Large Scale Integration) design automation, floorplanning is an initial and vital task performed in the early design stage. Experimental results using MCNC benchmark circuits show that our parallel algorithm produced better results than the corresponding sequential algorithm; we were able to speed up the algorithm up to 4 times, hence reducing computation time and maintaining floorplan solution quality. On the other hand, we compared both parallel versions; and the OpenMP results gave slightly better than the corresponding MPI results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207