Enhancing CuFP Library with Self-Alignment Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-Level Synthesis (HLS) tools have transformed FPGA development by streamlining digital design and enhancing efficiency. Meanwhile, advancements in semiconductor technology now support the integration of hundreds of floating-point units on a single chip, enabling more resource-intensive computations. CuFP, an HLS library, facilitates the creation of customized floating-point operators with configurable exponent and mantissa bit widths, providing greater flexibility and resource efficiency. This paper introduces the integration of the self-alignment technique (SAT) into the CuFP library, extending its capability for customized addition-related floating-point operations with enhanced precision and resource utilization. Our findings demonstrate that incorporating SAT into CuFP enables the efficient FPGA deployment of complex floating-point operators, achieving significant reductions in computational latency and improved resource efficiency. Specifically, for a vector size of 64, CuFPSAF reduces execution cycles by 29.4% compared to CuFP and by 81.5% compared to vendor IP while maintaining the same DSP utilization as CuFP and reducing it by 59.7% compared to vendor IP. These results highlight the efficiency of SAT in FPGA-based floating-point computations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
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".