MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288481254 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.06693

Module-per-Object: a Human-Driven Methodology for C++-based High-Level\n Synthesis Design

2019· preprint· en· W4288481254 on OpenAlexaff
Jeferson Santiago da Silva, François-Raymond Boyer, J. M. Pierre Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHigh-level synthesisVHDLField-programmable gate arrayComputer architectureHardware description languageEmbedded systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-Level Synthesis (HLS) brings FPGAs to audiences previously unfamiliar to\nhardware design. However, achieving the highest Quality-of-Results (QoR) with\nHLS is still unattainable for most programmers. This requires detailed\nknowledge of FPGA architecture and hardware design in order to produce\nFPGA-friendly codes. Moreover, these codes are normally in conflict with best\ncoding practices, which favor code reuse, modularity, and conciseness.\n To overcome these limitations, we propose Module-per-Object (MpO), a\nhuman-driven HLS design methodology intended for both hardware designers and\nsoftware developers with limited FPGA expertise. MpO exploits modern C++ to\nraise the abstraction level while improving QoR, code readability and\nmodularity. To guide HLS designers, we present the five characteristics of MpO\nclasses. Each characteristic exploits the power of HLS-supported modern C++\nfeatures to build C++-based hardware modules. These characteristics lead to\nhigh-quality software descriptions and efficient hardware generation. We also\npresent a use case of MpO, where we use C++ as the intermediate language for\nFPGA-targeted code generation from P4, a packet processing domain specific\nlanguage. The MpO methodology is evaluated using three design experiments: a\npacket parser, a flow-based traffic manager, and a digital up-converter. Based\non experiments, we show that MpO can be comparable to hand-written VHDL code\nwhile keeping a high abstraction level, human-readable coding style and\nmodularity. Compared to traditional C-based HLS design, MpO leads to more\nefficient circuit generation, both in terms of performance and resource\nutilization. Also, the MpO approach notably improves software quality,\naugmenting parametrization while eliminating the incidence of code duplication.\n

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 score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.063 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207