Learning to Compare Hardware Designs for High-Level Synthesis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
High-level synthesis (HLS) is an automated design process that transforms high-level code into hardware designs, enabling the rapid development of hardware accelerators. HLS relies on pragmas, which are directives inserted into the source code to guide the synthesis process, and pragmas have various settings and values that significantly impact the resulting hardware design. State-of-the-art ML-based HLS methods, such as HARP, first train a deep learning model, typically based on graph neural networks (GNNs) applied to graph-based representations of the source code and pragmas. They then perform design space exploration (DSE) to explore the pragma design space, rank candidate designs using the model, and return the top designs. However, traditional DSE methods face challenges due to the highly nonlinear relationship between pragma settings and performance metrics, along with complex interactions between pragmas that affect performance in non-obvious ways. To address these challenges, we propose compareXplore, a novel approach that learns to compare hardware designs for effective HLS optimization. CompareXplore introduces a hybrid loss function that combines pairwise preference learning with pointwise performance prediction, enabling the model to capture both relative preferences and absolute performance. Moreover, we introduce a novel node difference attention module that focuses on the most informative differences between designs, enabling the model to identify critical pragmas impacting performance. CompareXplore adopts a two-stage DSE, where a pointwise prediction model is used for the initial design pruning, followed by a pairwise comparison stage for precise performance verification. In extensive experiments, compareXplore achieves significant improvements in ranking metrics and generates high-quality HLS results for the selected designs, outperforming the existing SOTA method.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Sep 2024.
Builds on
17 of 38 references.
References · 17
- 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,854
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2016SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restartscited by 4,993
- 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,355
- 2019A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networkscited by 2,906
- 2019Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometriccited by 2,414
- 2020Masked Label Prediction: Unified Message Passing Model for Semi-Supervised Classificationcited by 500
- 2014Deep metric learning using Triplet networkcited by 421
- 2023Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignmentcited by 283
- 2015Simple, Robust and Optimal Ranking from Pairwise Comparisonscited by 68
- 2021IronMan: GNN-assisted Design Space Exploration in High-Level Synthesis via Reinforcement Learningcited by 26
- 2020AutoDSE: Enabling Software Programmers to Design Efficient FPGA Acceleratorscited by 25
5 more
- 2022High-Level Synthesis Performance Prediction using GNNs: Benchmarking, Modeling, and Advancingcited by 25
- 2018Metric Learning for Novelty and Anomaly Detectioncited by 21
- 2021Sentence Similarity Based on Contextscited by 12
- 2019Pairwise Neural Machine Translation Evaluationcited by 11
- 2024Learning to rank quantum circuits for hardware-optimized performance enhancementcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3.
3 papers.