Advertisement

Circuit Approximation Using Single- and Multi-objective Cartesian GP

  • Zdenek Vasicek
  • Lukas Sekanina
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9025)

Abstract

In this paper, the approximate circuit design problem is formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem in which the circuit error and power consumption are conflicting design objectives. We compare multi-objective and single-objective Cartesian genetic programming in the task of parallel adder and multiplier approximation. It is analyzed how the setting of the methods, formulating the problem as multi-objective or single-objective, and constraining the execution time can influence the quality of results. One of the conclusions is that the multi-objective approach is useful if the number of allowed evaluations is low. When more time is available, the single-objective approach becomes more efficient.

Keywords

Genetic programming Cartesian genetic programming Evolutionary design Approximate computing Approximate circuits Multi-objective approach 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Czech science foundation project Advanced Methods for Evolutionary Design of Complex Digital Circuits 14-04197S. The authors would like to thank Jiri Petrlik for useful discussions on multi-objective evolutionary optimization.

References

  1. 1.
    Chakradhar, S.T., Raghunathan, A.: Best-effort computing: Re-thinking parallel software and hardware. In: Proceedings of the 47th Design Automation Conference - DAC, pp. 865–870. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deb, K.: Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. Wiley, Chichester (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., Meyarivan, T.: A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: Nsga-ii. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 6(2), 182–197 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gupta, V., Mohapatra, D., Raghunathan, A., Roy, K.: Low-power digital signal processing using approximate adders. IEEE Trans. CAD Integr. Circ. Syst. 32(1), 124–137 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Han, J., Orshansky, M.: Approximate computing: An emerging paradigm for energy-efficient design. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE European Test Symposium, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hilder, J., Walker, J., Tyrrell, A.: Use of a multi-objective fitness function to improve Cartesian genetic programming circuits. In: NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems, pp. 179–185. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kulkarni, P., Gupta, P., Ercegovac, M.D.: Trading accuracy for power in a multiplier architecture. J. Low Power Electron. 7(4), 490–501 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Miller, J.F.: Cartesian Genetic Programming. Springer, Berlin (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nepal, K., Li, Y., Bahar, R.I., Reda, S.: Abacus: A technique for automated behavioral synthesis of approximate computing circuits. In: Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 1–6. DATE 2014, EDA Consortium (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sekanina, L., Vasicek, Z.: Approximate circuits by means of evolvable hardware. In: IEEE Int. Conf. on Evolvable Systems, SSCI-ICES. pp. 21–28. IEEE CIS (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vasicek, Z., Sekanina, L.: Evolutionary approach to approximate digital circuits design. IEEE Tran. on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1–13 (2015 to appear)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Venkataramani, S., Roy, K., Raghunathan, A.: Substitute-and-simplify: a unified design paradigm for approximate and quality configurable circuits. Design. Automation and Test in Europe, DATE 2013, pp. 1367–1372. EDA Consortium San Jose, CA, USA (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Venkataramani, S., Sabne, A., Kozhikkottu, V.J., Roy, K., Raghunathan, A.: Salsa: systematic logic synthesis of approximate circuits. In: The 49th Annual Design Automation Conference 2012, DAC 2012, pp. 796–801. ACM (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Information Technology, IT4Innovations Centre of ExcellenceBrno University of TechnologyBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations