RoutePlacer: An End-to-End Routability-Aware Placer with Graph Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Placement is a critical and challenging step of modern chip design, with routability being an essential indicator of placement quality. Current routability-oriented placers typically apply an iterative two-stage approach, wherein the first stage generates a placement solution, and the second stage provides non-differentiable routing results to heuristically improve the solution quality. This method hinders jointly optimizing the routability aspect during placement. To address this problem, this work introduces RoutePlacer, an end-to-end routability-aware placement method. It trains RouteGNN, a customized graph neural network, to efficiently and accurately predict routability by capturing and fusing geometric and topological representations of placements. Well-trained RouteGNN then serves as a differentiable approximation of routability, enabling end-to-end gradient-based routability optimization. In addition, RouteGNN can improve two-stage placers as a plug-and-play alternative to external routers. Our experiments on DREAMPlace, an open-source AI4EDA platform, show that RoutePlacer can reduce Total Overflow by up to 16% while maintaining routed wirelength, compared to the state-of-the-art; integrating RouteGNN within two-stage placers leads to a 44% reduction in Total Overflow without compromising wirelength.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".