MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gate-level Circuit Partitioning Algorithm Based on Cut Vertex and Betweenness Centrality

2022· article· en· W4320802294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yiquan Wang, Linzi Yin, Yan Zhao, Xuemei Xu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 34th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBetweenness centralityAlgorithmComputer scienceVertex (graph theory)Logic gateCentralityOverhead (engineering)Parallel computingMathematicsTheoretical computer scienceCombinatoricsGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circuit partitioning is a key link in gate-level parallel simulation. Existing circuit partitioning algorithms usually require the number of cells included in each subset to be balanced first, and secondly, the number of interconnections between each subset is as small as possible. The time and computing resources overhead of gate-level parallel simulation will increase significantly as the number of interconnections between the partitioned subsets increases, and the requirement for balanced result of the partitioning takes second place. To this end, a gate-level circuit partitioning algorithm based on cut vertex and betweenness centrality was proposed, which evaluated cut vertex through betweenness centrality, searched and partitioned based on the optimal cut vertex that met the equilibrium condition, minimized interconnections first, and made the number of logic gates contained in each subset relatively balanced. The experimental results of this algorithm in the actual gate-level circuit partitioning show that compared with the KL algorithm and the METIS partitioning tool, the algorithm can get fewer interconnections.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 34th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC)Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207