Power and Area Efficient FSM with Comparison-Free Sorting Algorithm for Write-Evaluate Phase and Read-Sort Phase

  • T. A. S. BhargavEmail author
  • E. PrabhuEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 968)


In this paper, a comparison-free sorting algorithm is proposed for negative and positive elements which satisfies the conditions such as hardware complexity. The basic idea is to sort the array of input integer elements without performing any comparison related operations between the data. Sorting technique for negative and positive numbers are executed involving similar hardware. Therefore, it doesn’t require any complex hardware design. This avoids any usage of memory such as SRAM or any circuitry involving complex design as compared to that of the ones used in other conventional sorting practices. Instead the proposed work utilizes basic registers to store the binary elements. FSM module is proposed with a comparison-free sorting algorithm in order to reduce hardware complexity. All the designs are coded in VHDL and verified using ModelSim SE10.4d simulator. The conventional and the proposed design are synthesized using Vivado and Synopsys DC Design Compiler (90 nm CMOS technology). From the synthesis report, it is observed that proposed FSM with comparison-free sorting algorithm has reduction in power and area compared to the conventional design.


Sorting algorithm Finite state machine Write-evaluation phase Read-sort phase 


  1. 1.
    Abdel-Hafeez, S., Gordon-Ross, A.: An efficient O(N) comparison-free sorting algorithm. IEEE Trans. Very Large Scale Integr. Syst. 25, 1930–1942 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Canaan, C., Garai, M.S., Daya, M.: Popular sorting algorithms. World Appl. Program. 1(1), 6271 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Busse, L.M., Chehreghani, M.H., Buhmann, J.M.: The information content in sorting algorithms. In: Proceedings IEEE International Symposium Information Theory (ISIT), pp. 2746–2750 July 2012Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koike, A., Sadakane, K.: A novel computational model for GPUs with application to I/O optimal sorting algorithms. In: 2014 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops (IPDPSW), pp. 614–623. IEEE, May 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lupescu, G., Sluanschi, E.I., Tpu, N.: Using the integrated GPU to improve CPU sort performance. In: 2017 46th International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops (ICPPW), (pp. 39–44). IEEE 2017, AugustGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sareen, P.: Comparison of sorting algorithms (on the basis of the average case). Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Sci. Softw. Eng. 3(3), 522–532 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lindstrom, E.E., Vitter, J.S., Wong, C.K.: Introduction–sorting. IEEE Trans. Comput. 100(4), 293–295 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Khan, F.G., Khan, O.U., Montrucchio, B. Giaccone, P.: Analysis of fast parallel sorting algorithms for GPU architectures. In: 2011 Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), pp. 173–178. IEEE, December 2011Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harish Ram D.S., Bhuvaneswari, M.C., Logesh, S.M.: A novel evolutionary technique for multi-objective power area and delay optimization in high level synthesis of datapaths. In: Proceedings 2011 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI, ISVLSI 2011, Chennai, pp. 290–295 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prabhu, E., Mangalam, H., Gokul, P.R.: A delay efficient vedic multiplier. In: Proceedings National Academy of Sciences, India, Section A: Physical Sciences (2018).
  11. 11.
    Madhukar Reddy, B., Prabhu, E.: An efficient 16-bit carry select adder with optimized power and delay. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 10(11), 27909–27916 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Amrita Vishwa VidyapeethamAmrita School of EngineeringCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations