MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133014279

Fast CAD for FPGAs

2014· dissertation· W7133014279 on OpenAlexaff
Marcel Gort

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2014
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayCADRouting (electronic design automation)Process (computing)FPGA prototypeReconfigurable computingReduction (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As field-programmable gate array (FPGA) capacities continue to increase in lockstep with semiconductor process shrinking, they are being used for increasingly complex applications. However, because FPGAs are bit-level programmable, the task of generating an FPGA implementation from a user's application description is quite complicated. The CAD tools responsible for this are long-running, taking up to a day to generate an FPGA implementation for the largest applications. This thesis presents several approaches to speed-up FPGA CAD tools.The first proposed approach is to parallelize routing, one of the longest running FPGA CAD steps. The second approach is to modify the FPGA architecture such that a coarsened graph representation can be used during the routing stage, which reduces run-time. This approach involves both architectural and algorithmic changes.Next, a fast analytical technique is proposed for the placement stage, another of the longest-running CAD phases. Following that, this thesis proposes that a library of pre-compiled solutions to commonly occurring application fragments be maintained and re-used when possible. Re-using these application fragments leads to a reduction in CAD run-time, since the entire FPGA implementation need not be generated from scratch. Lastly, this thesis presents an approach that can be used to reduce bitwidths, leading to smaller circuits, which reduces CAD complexity and run-time.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207