Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
In this paper, we evaluate various large-integer multiplication methods suitable for resource-constrained devices like passive RFIDs. We restrict our investigations on multi-precision multiplication units in hardware and evaluate their performance regarding area, power, and speed. We implemented and compared different multiplier techniques: array, bit-and digit-serial, Booth, and Karatsuba. We synthesized all designs for a 130 nm low-leakage CMOS process technology. In total, we compared 21 different multipliers with input-word sizes ranging from 8 to 64 bits and having an operating frequency of 1 MHz. The best area-time-power product has been achieved by a 4-bit digit-serial multiplication method. These results are interesting because they have been fairly obtained from a single design flow and by using the same tools. The results can serve as first estimation criterias for forecasting the costs for multiplication-demanding applications running on devices with very limited resources. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2014 | 10.1109/DSD.2014.52 | DSD |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
smart cards,rfid,karatsuba technique,low-leakage cmos process technology,hardware security,cryptography,size 130 nm,multiplication-demanding applications,array technique,digital arithmetic,complimentary metal oxide semiconductor,multi-precision multiplication, embedded systems, hardware security, smart cards, rfid,bit-and digit-serial technique,radiofrequency identification,multi-precision multiplication,area-time-power product,frequency 1 mhz,large-integer multiplication methods,digit-serial multiplication method,embedded systems,resource-constrained device,multiprecision multiplication,booth technique,multiplexing,adders,hardware,registers | Hardware security module,Adder,Computer science,Parallel computing,Multiplier (economics),Design flow,Multiplication,Ranging,Computer hardware,Multiplexing,Karatsuba algorithm | Conference |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.36 | 9 |
Authors | ||
2 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wolfgang Wieser | 1 | 8 | 1.00 |
| Michael Hutter | 2 | 345 | 25.26 |