MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392849806 · doi:10.1145/3650036

Designing an IEEE-Compliant FPU that Supports Configurable Precision for Soft Processors

2024· article· en· W4392849806 on OpenAlexafffund
Chris Keilbart, Yuhui Gao, Martin Chua, Eric Matthews, Steven J. E. Wilton, Lesley Shannon

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Reconfigurable Technology and Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNumerical Methods and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arraySingle-precision floating-point formatScalabilityLookup tableLatency (audio)Floating pointParallel computingEmbedded systemComputer hardwareAlgorithmOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) are commonly used to accelerate floating-point (FP) applications. Although researchers have extensively studied FPGA FP implementations, existing work has largely focused on standalone operators and frequency-optimized designs. These works are not suitable for FPGA soft processors which are more sensitive to latency, impose a lower frequency ceiling, and require IEEE FP standard compliance. We present an open-source floating-point unit (FPU) for FPGA RISC-V soft processors that is fully IEEE compliant with configurable levels of FP precision. Our design emphasizes runtime performance with 25% lower latency in the most common instructions compared to previous works while maintaining efficient resource utilization. Our FPU also allows users to explore various mantissa widths without having to rewrite or recompile their algorithms. We use this to investigate the scalability of our reduced-precision FPU across numerous microbenchmark functions as well as more complex case studies. Our experiments show that applications like the discrete cosine transformation and the Black-Scholes model can realize a speedup of more than 1.35x in conjunction with a 43% and 35% reduction in lookup table and flip-flop resources while experiencing less than a 0.025% average loss in numerical accuracy with a 16-bit mantissa width.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Reconfigurable Technology and SystemsSame topicNumerical Methods and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207