MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406266212 · doi:10.1109/sips62058.2024.00043

Efficient Assignment with Time Constraints for Heterogeneous DSP Systems

2024· article· en· W4406266212 on OpenAlexaff
Jiajie Li, Christophe Dubach, Warren J. Gross

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDigital signal processingComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-level synthesis (HLS) produces hardware au-tomatically by scheduling and assigning resources based on an input control/data-flow graph. One particular aspect of HLS for the digital signal processing (DSP) architecture is the het-erogeneous assignment problem (HAP) which maps operations into different types of functional units available in the electronic design automation tools to build efficient implementations. An optimal solution to this assignment problem can be found by formulating the problem as integer linear programming (ILP) and using a solver. However, given the slow nature of this process, heuristics tend to be used instead leading to sub-optimal designs. This paper revisits the classical ILP formulation of the HAP with time constraints for the DSP architecture by identifying redundant constraints. This paper proves theoretically, and demonstrates experimentally, that removing these constraints does not affect the obtained solution. This technique achieves speedups of more than 100 × in terms of runtime and reductions of more than 50 × in terms of memory usage of the solver. Also, this work proposes an updated heuristic that keeps reducing the latency of a path instead of finding a new critical path after giving a new node assignment. Runtime reductions (more than another 10×) due to reduced numbers of critical path searches are observed while returning similar results.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207