Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Michael Sartin-Tarm

dblp:130/5444 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2014
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 2

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers
Electronic design automation · 52% Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 48%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
2 papers
Compilers and program optimization · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Electronic design automation
high-level synthesis
0.212014
A Scheduling Framework for Spatial Architectures Across Multiple Constraint-Solving Theories · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2014
Electronic design automation › high-level synthesis
scheduling
0.212014
A Scheduling Framework for Spatial Architectures Across Multiple Constraint-Solving Theories · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2014
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures
spatial architecture
0.212014
A Scheduling Framework for Spatial Architectures Across Multiple Constraint-Solving Theories · ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 2014
Compilers and program optimization
instruction scheduling
0.212013
A general constraint-centric scheduling framework for spatial architectures · PLDI 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

constraint solving · 0.7SMT · 0.4ILP · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2014 A Scheduling Framework for Spatial Architectures Across Multiple Constraint-Solving Theories
abstract
Spatial architectures provide energy-efficient computation but require effective scheduling algorithms. Existing heuristic-based approaches offer low compiler/architect productivity, little optimality insight, and low architectural portability. We seek to develop a spatial-scheduling framework by utilizing constraint-solving theories and find that architecture primitives and scheduler responsibilities can be related through five abstractions: computation placement, data routing, event timing, resource utilization, and the optimization objective. We encode these responsibilities as 20 mathematical constraints, using SMT and ILP, and create schedulers for the TRIPS, DySER, and PLUG architectures. Our results show that a general declarative approach using constraint solving is implementable, is practical, and can outperform specialized schedulers.
Tony Nowatzki, Michael Sartin-Tarm, Lorenzo De Carli, Karthikeyan Sankaralingam, Cristian Estan, Behnam Robatmili
ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst.2
2013 A general constraint-centric scheduling framework for spatial architectures
abstract
Specialized execution using spatial architectures provides energy efficient computation, but requires effective algorithms for spatially scheduling the computation. Generally, this has been solved with architecture-specific heuristics, an approach which suffers from poor compiler/architect productivity, lack of insight on optimality, and inhibits migration of techniques between architectures.
Tony Nowatzki, Michael Sartin-Tarm, Lorenzo De Carli, Karthikeyan Sankaralingam, Cristian Estan, Behnam Robatmili
PLDI2