2013
DOI: 10.1109/tcsii.2013.2258246
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fine-Grain Dynamic Energy Tracking for System on Chip

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table V compares the error of the three models using six signals (the highest accuracy achieved) with the previously presented works that only consider the variation of the activity in their models. The most similar approaches are the ones that appraise the system activity using the toggling information with a linear model at the hardware level [16], [17]. The obtained average error in [16] for the small circuits (RAM and DSP) is about 7% at the resolution of 100 μs, while in [17] 2.5% of average error was achieved using nine signals for also small components such as a divider, a multiplier and an instruction/data caches.…”
Section: F Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Table V compares the error of the three models using six signals (the highest accuracy achieved) with the previously presented works that only consider the variation of the activity in their models. The most similar approaches are the ones that appraise the system activity using the toggling information with a linear model at the hardware level [16], [17]. The obtained average error in [16] for the small circuits (RAM and DSP) is about 7% at the resolution of 100 μs, while in [17] 2.5% of average error was achieved using nine signals for also small components such as a divider, a multiplier and an instruction/data caches.…”
Section: F Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most similar approaches are the ones that appraise the system activity using the toggling information with a linear model at the hardware level [16], [17]. The obtained average error in [16] for the small circuits (RAM and DSP) is about 7% at the resolution of 100 μs, while in [17] 2.5% of average error was achieved using nine signals for also small components such as a divider, a multiplier and an instruction/data caches. Our obtained average error is much lower compared to [16] at the same granularity, and is comparable to [17] with a lower overhead as the number of signals used in our linear model is lower (6 in this case).…”
Section: F Results Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The authors use data read miss and write miss to estimate the dynamic power for an interconnect component. Another approach based on Hidden Markov Models has been proposed in [10] to track at run-time the system power modes.…”
Section: Power Modeling Flowmentioning
confidence: 99%