Fixed-Point Polynomial Hardware Logic Error Distribution

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for implementing fixed-point polynomials in hardware logic are inefficient in terms of resource usage and do not guarantee bounded error, lacking a systematic approach to distribute and optimize error across operators in a data-flow graph.

Innovation Solution

The method optimizes the distribution of a user-defined maximum absolute error across operators in a data-flow graph by defining error in terms of precision and accuracy parameters, allowing for reduced resource usage and guaranteed error bounds, resulting in a hardware representation that minimizes area and power consumption while maintaining accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If existing methods for implementing fixed-point polynomials in hardware logic are used, then the implementation can be achieved, but resource usage is inefficient and error bounds are not guaranteed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror bound guaranteeVSAvoidhardware resource usage
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameters of the hardware implementation by distributing a user-defined maximum absolute error across operators in the data-flow graph. By defining error in terms of precision and accuracy parameters and optimizing each operator to satisfy allocated error portions, the system achieves guaranteed error bounds while reducing hardware resource usage through systematic error distribution and optimization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Area of stationary object

If hardware logic is optimized for reduced resource usage, then area and power consumption decrease, but error bounds may not be guaranteed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehardware areaVSAvoiderror bound guarantee
Core Design Contradiction:
Area of stationary objectVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the error distribution is optimized iteratively. The system distributes the maximum absolute error across operators, updates the distribution in an iterative process until a stop condition is reached, and ensures that each operator is optimized to satisfy its allocated error portion. This feedback loop guarantees error bounds while achieving reduced hardware area.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If iterative error distribution optimization is performed, then error bounds are guaranteed, but the time to generate hardware logic increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveerror bound guaranteeVSAvoidhardware generation time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by distributing the error bound before detailed hardware optimization. By first allocating error portions to each operator in the data-flow graph and then optimizing each operator to satisfy its allocated error, the system reduces the complexity of the iterative process and accelerates hardware generation time while maintaining error bound guarantees.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP3264295B1Low-area fixed-point polynomials
Publication Date: 2019.08.07 IMAGINATION TECH LTD
  • EP3264295B1 patent drawingFigure 1(a)~1(b)
  • EP3264295B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3264295B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Methods of implementing fixed-point polynomials in hardware logic are described. In an embodiment the method comprises distributing a defined error bound for the whole polynomial between operators in a data-flow graph for the polynomial by solving an optimization problem which outputs an accuracy parameter and a precision parameter for each node. Each operator is then itself optimized to satisfy the part of the error bound allocated to that operator and as defined by the accuracy and precision parameters. To be accompanied, when published, by Figure 3 of the accompanying drawings.