{"title":"各种决策图机的结构比较","authors":"Hiroki Nakahara, Tsutomu Sasao, M. Matsuura","doi":"10.1109/ISMVL.2010.50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper compares 6 decision diagram machines (DDMs) with respect to area-time complexity, throughput, and compatibility to the existing memory. First, 6 types of decision diagrams (DDs): BDD, MDD, QRBDD, QRMDD, heterogeneous MDD (HMDD), and QRHMDD are introduced. Second, corresponding DDMs are developed. Third, memory sizes and average path length (APL) for these DDs are compared. As for area-time complexity, the QDDM is the best; as for throughput, the QRQDDM is the best; and as for compatibility to the existing memory, the HMDDM is the best.","PeriodicalId":447743,"journal":{"name":"2010 40th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Architectures for Various Decision Diagram Machines\",\"authors\":\"Hiroki Nakahara, Tsutomu Sasao, M. Matsuura\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISMVL.2010.50\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper compares 6 decision diagram machines (DDMs) with respect to area-time complexity, throughput, and compatibility to the existing memory. First, 6 types of decision diagrams (DDs): BDD, MDD, QRBDD, QRMDD, heterogeneous MDD (HMDD), and QRHMDD are introduced. Second, corresponding DDMs are developed. Third, memory sizes and average path length (APL) for these DDs are compared. As for area-time complexity, the QDDM is the best; as for throughput, the QRQDDM is the best; and as for compatibility to the existing memory, the HMDDM is the best.\",\"PeriodicalId\":447743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2010 40th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2010 40th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMVL.2010.50\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2010 40th IEEE International Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMVL.2010.50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Comparison of Architectures for Various Decision Diagram Machines
This paper compares 6 decision diagram machines (DDMs) with respect to area-time complexity, throughput, and compatibility to the existing memory. First, 6 types of decision diagrams (DDs): BDD, MDD, QRBDD, QRMDD, heterogeneous MDD (HMDD), and QRHMDD are introduced. Second, corresponding DDMs are developed. Third, memory sizes and average path length (APL) for these DDs are compared. As for area-time complexity, the QDDM is the best; as for throughput, the QRQDDM is the best; and as for compatibility to the existing memory, the HMDDM is the best.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
