Advertisement

Simulated Evolution (SimE) Based Embedded System Synthesis Algorithm for Electric Circuit Units (ECUs)

  • Umair F. Siddiqi
  • Yoichi Shiraishi
  • Mona A. El-Dahb
  • Sadiq M. Sait
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6593)

Abstract

ECU (Electric Circuit Unit) is a type of embedded system that is used in automobiles to perform different functions. The synthesis process of ECU requires that the hardware should be optimized for cost, power consumption and provides fault tolerance as many applications are related to car safety systems. This paper presents a Simulated Evolution (SimE) based multiobjective optimization algorithm to perform the ECU synthesis. The optimization objectives are: optimizing hardware cost, power consumption and also provides fault tolerance from single faults. The performance of the proposed algorithm is measured and compared with Parallel Re-combinative Simulated Annealing (PRSA) and Genetic Algorithm (GA). The comparison results show that the proposed algorithm has an execution time that is 5.19 and 1.15 times lesser, and cost of the synthesized hardware that is 3.35 and 2.73 times lesser than the PRSA and GA. The power consumption of the PRSA and GA (without fault tolerance) are 0.94 and 0.68 times of the proposed algorithm with fault tolerance.

Keywords

Electric Circuit Unit Embedded Systems Synthesis allocation assignment scheduling Simulated Evolution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Di Natale, M.: Embedded System Design for Automotive Applications. Computer 40(10), 42–51 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shang, L., Dick, R.P., Jha, N.K.: SLOPES: Hardware-Software Cosynthesis of Low Power Cosynthesis of Low-Power Real-Time Distributed Embedded Systems with Dynamically Reconfigurable FPGAs. IEEE Transactions on Computer Aided Integrated Circuits & Systems 26(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman and Co., New York (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kwok, Y.-K., Ahmad, I.: Dynamic Critical-Path Scheduling: An Effective Technique for Allocating Task Graphs to Multiprocessors. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 7(5), 506–521 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sait, S.M., Youssef, H.: Iterative Computer Algorithms with Applications in Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sait, S.M., El-Barr, A., Al-Saiari, U.S., Sarif, B.A.B.: Digital Circuit Design Through Simulated Evolution (SimE). In: The 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (IEEE CEC 2003), Canberra, Australia, vol. 1, pp. 375–381 (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Al-Saiari, U.S.: Digital Circuit Design Through Simulated Evolution, MS Thesis, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahfoud, S.W., Goldberg, D.E.: Parallel Recombinative Simulated Annealing: A Genetic Algorithm. Parallel Computing 21(1), 1–28 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kianzad, V., Bhattacharyya, S.S.: CHARMED: A Multiobjective Co-Synthesis Framework for Multi-mode Embedded Systems. In: Proc. 15th IEEE Conference on Application Specific Systems, Architectures and Processors (ASAP 2004), pp. 28–40 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zitler, E., Laumanns, M., Thiele, L.: SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm for Multiobjective Optimization. In: Evolutionary Methods for Design, Optimization, and Control, pp. 95–100 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kuchcinski, K.: Constraints-Driven Scheduling and Resource Assignment. ACM Transactions on Design Automation of Electronic Systems 8(3), 355–383 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pop, P., Izosimov, V., Eles, P., Peng, Z.: Design Optimization of Time- and Cost-Constrained Fault-Tolerant Embedded Systems with Checkpointing and Replication. IEEE Transactions on VLSI Systems 17(3) (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Punnekkat, S., Burns, A., Davis, R.: Analysis of checkpointing for real-time systems. Real-Timr J. 20(1), 83–102 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kling, R.M., Banerjee, P.: ESP: Placement by Simulated Evolution. IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 8(3), 245–256 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dick, R.P., Rhodes, D.L., Wolf, W.: TGFF: task graphs for free. In: Proc. of the Sixth Intl. Workshop on Hardware/Software Codesign (CODES/CASHE 1998), Seattle, WA (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Umair F. Siddiqi
    • 1
  • Yoichi Shiraishi
    • 1
  • Mona A. El-Dahb
    • 1
  • Sadiq M. Sait
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Production Science & TechnologyGunma UniversityJapan
  2. 2.King Fahd University of Petroleum & MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations