MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296700647 · doi:10.18280/isi.270403

Accurate Power Estimation Identity for DSP Blocks Targeted to FPGAs

2022· article· en· W4296700647 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neerja Singh, Gaurav Verma, Vijay Khare

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital signal processingComputer scienceSuitePower (physics)Field-programmable gate arrayBlock (permutation group theory)Identity (music)Embedded systemComputer engineeringComputer hardwareMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the main challenge in front of system designers is to design power-efficient systems with reduced design turnaround time. It can be achieved in two ways, firstly, utilize off-shelf components (Intellectual Property cores) along with user-defined IPs. Secondly, estimate the power at an early stage of the design cycle. Therefore, this paper represents the power estimation of Cascaded and Non-Cascaded DSP blocks based on IP modeling. The DSP blocks are designed using a blend of embedded and user-defined IP cores. Curve-fitting and regression-based models for power evaluation have been created for each IP core. The power of the complete DSP block is estimated using identity projected by Elleouet et al. by incorporating the power values of each IP core obtained from the regression-based models. The models have been validated for accuracy using the power values gained from the commercial tool (Vivado design suite (2014.2)). From the analysis, it has been found that the identity is providing inaccurate results for cascaded DSP blocks. Therefore, in this work, a new identity has been proposed that has been estimating the power of the cascaded systems accurately and also in alignment with the results of a commercial tool.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

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 communication0.0000.003
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 head0.238
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207