Research on Circuit Partitioning Algorithm Based on Partition Connectivity Clustering and Tabu Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a circuit-partitioning method is proposed based on partition connectivity clustering and tabu search. It includes four phases: coarsening, initial partitioning, uncoarsening, and refinement. In the initial partitioning phase, the concept of partition connectivity is introduced to optimize the vertex-clustering process, which clusters vertices with high connectivity in advance to provide an optimal initial solution. In the refinement phase, an improved tabu search algorithm is proposed, which combines two flexible neighborhood search rules and a candidate solution-selection strategy based on vertex-exchange frequency to further optimize load balancing. Additionally, a random perturbation method is suggested to increase the diversity of the search space and improve both the depth and breadth of global search. The experimental results based on the ISCAS-89 and ISCAS-85 benchmark circuits show that the average cut size of the proposed circuit-partitioning method is 0.91 times that of METIS and 0.86 times that of the KL algorithm, with better performance for medium- and small-scale circuits.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".