TAPA: A Scalable Task-parallel Dataflow Programming Framework for Modern FPGAs with Co-optimization of HLS and Physical Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose TAPA, an end-to-end framework that compiles a C++ task-parallel dataflow program into a high-frequency FPGA accelerator. Compared to existing solutions, TAPA has two major advantages. First, TAPA provides a set of convenient APIs that allows users to easily express flexible and complex inter-task communication structures. Second, TAPA adopts a coarse-grained floorplanning step during HLS compilation for accurate pipelining of potential critical paths. In addition, TAPA implements several optimization techniques specifically tailored for modern HBM-based FPGAs. In our experiments with a total of 43 designs, we improve the average frequency from 147 MHz to 297 MHz (a 102% improvement) with no loss of throughput and a negligible change in resource utilization. Notably, in 16 experiments, we make the originally unroutable designs achieve 274 MHz, on average. The framework is available at https://github.com/UCLA-VAST/tapa and the core floorplan module is available at https://github.com/UCLA-VAST/AutoBridge
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".