Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.5555/2971808.2972020guideproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesConference Proceedingsacm-pubtype
research-article
Free access

Adaptive threshold non-pareto elimination: re-thinking machine learning for system level design space exploration on FPGAs

Published: 14 March 2016 Publication History

Abstract

One major bottleneck of the system level OpenCL-to-FPGA design tools is their extremely time consuming synthesis process (including place and route). The design space for a typical OpenCL application contains thousands of possible designs even when considering a small number of design space parameters. It costs months of compute time to synthesize all these possible designs into end-to-end FPGA implementations. Thus, the brute force design space exploration (DSE) is impractical for these design tools.
Machine learning is one solution that identifies the valuable Pareto designs by sampling only a small portion of the entire design space. However, most of the existing machine learning frameworks focus on improving the design objective regression accuracy, which is not necessarily suitable for the FPGA DSE task. To address this issue, we propose a novel strategy - Adaptive Threshold Non-Pareto Elimination (ATNE). Instead of focusing on regression accuracy improvement, ATNE focuses on understanding and estimating the inaccuracy. ATNE provides a Pareto identification threshold that adapts to the estimated inaccuracy of the regressor. This adaptive threshold results in a more efficient DSE. For the same prediction quality, ATNE reduces the synthesis complexity by 1.6-2.89x (hundreds of synthesis hours) against the other state of the art frameworks for FPGA DSE. In addition, ATNE is capable of identifying the Pareto designs for certain difficult design spaces which the other existing frameworks are incapable of exploring effectively.

References

[1]
D. Hefenbrock et al., "Accelerating viola-jones face detection to fpga-level using gpus," in Proc. 18th IEEE Annu. Int. Symp. Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM), 2010, pp. 11--18.
[2]
C. Olson et al., "Hardware acceleration of short read mapping," in Proc. 20th IEEE Annu. Int. Symp. Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM), 2012, pp. 161--168.
[3]
C. Zhang et al., "Optimizing fpga-based accelerator design for deep convolutional neural networks," in Proc. ACM/SIGDA Int. Symp. Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA), 2015, pp. 161--170.
[4]
D. Chen and D. Singh, "Fractal video compression in opencl: An evaluation of cpus, gpus, and fpgas as acceleration platforms," in Proc. 18th Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conf. (ASP-DAC), 2013, pp. 297--304.
[5]
V. Morales et al., "Energy-efficient fpga implementation for binomial option pricing using opencl," in Proc. Conf. on Design, Automation & Test in Europe (DATE), 2014, pp. 208:1--208:6.
[6]
M. K. Papamichael et al., "Nautilus: Fast automated ip design space search using guided genetic algorithms," in Proc. 52nd Annu. Design Automation Conf. (DAC), 2015, pp. 43:1--43:6.
[7]
N. Kapre et al., "Intime: A machine learning approach for efficient selection of fpga cad tool parameters," in Proc. ACM/SIGDA Int. Symp. Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA), 2015, pp. 23--26.
[8]
H.-Y. Liu and L. P. Carloni, "On learning-based methods for design-space exploration with high-level synthesis," in Proc. 50th Annu. Design Automation Conf. (DAC), 2013, pp. 50:1--50:7.
[9]
M. Zuluaga et al., "Active learning for multi-objective optimization," in Proc. 30th Int. Conf. on Machine Learning (ICML), 2013, pp. 462--470.
[10]
G. Palermo et al., "Respir: A response surface-based pareto iterative refinement for application-specific design space exploration," IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst., vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 1816--1829, Dec 2009.
[11]
E. Zitzler et al., "The hypervolume indicator revisited: On the design of pareto-compliant indicators via weighted integration," in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Evolutionary Multi-criterion Optimization, 2007, pp. 862--876.
[12]
K. Yu et al., "Active learning via transductive experimental design," in Proc. 23rd Int. Conf. Machine Learning (ICML), 2006, pp. 1081--1088.
[13]
S. Dasgupta, "Two faces of active learning," Theor. Comput. Sci., vol. 412, no. 19, pp. 1767--1781, Apr 2011.
[14]
L. Breiman, "Random forests," Machine Learning, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 5--32, Oct 2001.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)A Survey of Machine Learning for Computer Architecture and SystemsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/349452355:3(1-39)Online publication date: 3-Feb-2022
  • (2021)Machine Learning for Electronic Design Automation: A SurveyACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems10.1145/345117926:5(1-46)Online publication date: 5-Jun-2021
  • (2020)Transfer Learning for Design-Space Exploration with High-Level SynthesisProceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE Workshop on Machine Learning for CAD10.1145/3380446.3430636(163-168)Online publication date: 16-Nov-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Guide Proceedings
DATE '16: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Design, Automation & Test in Europe
March 2016
1779 pages
ISBN:9783981537062
  • General Chair:
  • Luca Fanucci,
  • Program Chair:
  • Jürgen Teich

Sponsors

  • IMEC: IMEC
  • Systematic: Systematic Paris-Region Systems & ICT Cluster
  • DREWAG: DREWAG
  • AENEAS: AENEAS
  • Technical University of Dresden
  • CMP: Circuits Multi Projets
  • PENTA: PENTA
  • CISCO
  • OFFIS: Oldenburger Institut für Informatik
  • Goethe University: Goethe University Frankfurt

Publisher

EDA Consortium

San Jose, CA, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 March 2016

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)58
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)14
Reflects downloads up to 05 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)A Survey of Machine Learning for Computer Architecture and SystemsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/349452355:3(1-39)Online publication date: 3-Feb-2022
  • (2021)Machine Learning for Electronic Design Automation: A SurveyACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems10.1145/345117926:5(1-46)Online publication date: 5-Jun-2021
  • (2020)Transfer Learning for Design-Space Exploration with High-Level SynthesisProceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE Workshop on Machine Learning for CAD10.1145/3380446.3430636(163-168)Online publication date: 16-Nov-2020
  • (2019)A Learning-Based Recommender System for Autotuning Design Flows of Industrial High-Performance ProcessorsProceedings of the 56th Annual Design Automation Conference 201910.1145/3316781.3323919(1-6)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2019
  • (2019)Accelerating FPGA Prototyping through Predictive Model-Based HLS Design Space ExplorationProceedings of the 56th Annual Design Automation Conference 201910.1145/3316781.3317754(1-6)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2019
  • (2019)Group influence based improved firefly algorithm for Design Space Exploration of Datapath resource allocationApplied Intelligence10.1007/s10489-018-1371-349:6(2084-2100)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2019

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Login options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media