Evolving EDA Beyond its E-Roots: An Overview (invited paper) Andrew B. Kahng †‡ and Farinaz Koushanfar † ∗ † ECE and ‡ CSE Depts., UC San Diego * ECE Dept., Rice University

Outline Motivation, challenges, and our story Study groups overview – Group I: Systemization of prior efforts – Group II: Metrics of DA research impact – Group III: Vision for the EDA field Research gap analysis The 2015 DA perspective challenge Looking forward

Motivation Electronic design automation (EDA) – is an engineering success story – has mainly focused on supporting cost scaling, i.e., “More Moore” – one of the first truly inter-disciplinary fields – has reached a mature state as semiconductors also matured – is witnessing a diminished interest among ECE and CS students Urgent to revisit how the EDA field will evolve & grow Healthy growth requires exciting new directions as well as a steady supply of new experts trained at the graduate level

Challenges How can the EDA paradigms and methodologies be leveraged for DA in other, emerging domains to solve standing real-world problems? EDA researchers actively contribute to other fields’ DA But… evolution and growth as a community requires a more systematic, coherent effort – as well as vision How can EDA systematically “move beyond its E-roots”? To address the challenges, we have formed a recent initiative of the IEEE Council on Electronic Design Automation (CEDA)

Our story Two seeds of this initiative: – Series of CCC workshops on extreme-scale design automation – CANDE (ComputerAided Network DEsign) committee (since 1972) Redirecting CANDE under CEDA president-elect, Dr. Shishpal Rawat, focusing on new initiatives/ activities Our team (organized into three study groups): – Group I: Farinaz Koushanfar, Gang Qu, Zhiru Zhang – Group II: Andrew B. Kahng, Gi-Joon Nam, David Pan – Group III: Deming Chen, Priyank Kalla, Subhasish Mitra, Steven Levitan, Miodrag Potkonjak

Study Groups Overview Group I: Systemization of prior efforts – Summarized & analyzed: (i) Recent roadmaps; (ii) NSF EDA Expedition grants; and (iii) SRC focused research centers Group II: Metrics of DA research impact – Analysis of research outputs, leveraged funding, industry and publication data with modern text mining Group III: Vision for the EDA field – Focusing on new opportunities inspired by technologies and applications, and real-world problems More details in this session talks and papers [1][2][3] [1] Koushanfar, Mirhoseini, Qu, Zhang, "DA Systemization of Knowledge: A Catalog of Prior Forward-Looking Initiatives (invited paper)", ICCAD [2] Kahng, Luo, Nam, Nath, Pan, Robins, " Toward Metrics of Design Automation Research Impact (invited paper)", ICCAD [3] Potkonjak, Chen, Kalla, Levitan, “DA Vision 2015: From Here to Eternity (invited paper)", ICCAD 2015.

RESEARCH GAP ANALYSIS

Research gap analysis (1/2) SRC studies to determine the magnitude of research and world-wide “research gap” – Research needs derived from ITRS technology requirements in the 2001 and 2003 studies – Massive funding gaps identified in studies Estimated Worldwide annual research investment to support needs

Research gap analysis (2/2) 2001 Recommendations for addressing research gap – The US semiconductor industry must consider increasing $ for long-term horizon ITRS research – SRC and MARCO must explore options to attract foreign semiconductor companies as full members – SRC and MARCO explore collaborations w foreign consortia – SRC needs better coordination with US government semiconductor related funding programs Many of the recommendations and conclusions of the analysis seem to be timely even today!

DA PERSPECTIVE CHALLENGE 2015

DA perspective challenge 2015 (1/2) Submitters of the challenge asked to suggest long- term problems and their challenges: – What is the long-term problem – Why is the problem important and challenging? – What is the state-of-the-art? – What is the problem’s relevance to existing DA tools and methods? How can DA help in addressing the challenges? – What knowledge, skills, and/or tools needed for addressing? – Is the problem interdisciplinary, requiring expertise other than DA? – What are the broader impacts?

DA perspective challenge 2015 (2/2) 30 submissions, 13 invited to the – 3-minutes talks to a panel of 6 academic/industrial judges – 1 st prize: Huang&Cheng (UCSB) - DA of flexible electronics – 2 nd prize: Chen&Li (Penn State) - DA for neuromorphic – 3 rd prize: Chang (KAIST) - Energy optimization for EVs – Audience favorite: (U of Calgary) DA of energy systems – Honorable mentions: (IBM Research) DA for networks of autonomous vehicles; (MIT) DA for trusted hardware The prize winners will be participating in our panel

LOOKING FORWARD

Looking forward EDA has been successful as a field, but has reached a mature state Growing beyond our E-roots requires systematic community effort and vision Report on our recent CEDA initiative and efforts of 3 study groups Research gap analysis DA perspective challenge 2015: – Input from the community about their EDA vision Need your help in moving forward! X

Thank you! Questions?