SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.30932

Beacon: LLM Multi-Agent Driven Hardware Design Space Exploration for Heterogeneous Multi-Chiplet Deep Learning Accelerators

Abstract

Heterogeneous multi-chiplet accelerators allow chiplets to be configured independently to better match different operator characteristics and improve inference efficiency. However, heterogeneity makes simulator evaluation expensive, limiting the number of iterations affordable for hardware design space exploration (HW-DSE). Mainstream data-driven methods rely mainly on final metrics and a few predefined states, and require many search iterations to implicitly learn the relationships between input parameters and optimization objectives, making them less effective in this setting. In practice, evaluators also generate detailed reports on execution timelines, resource utilization, memory accesses, and communication behavior. Large language models (LLMs) can combine domain knowledge with these reports to explicitly identify bottleneck locations, degradation causes, and parameter adjustment directions, thereby improving each design decision under limited iteration budgets. Based on this observation, we propose Beacon, a report-driven LLM multi-agent framework for heterogeneous multi-chiplet HW-DSE. Beacon employs hierarchical agents for bottleneck localization, root-cause diagnosis, and hardware candidate generation, together with an Analysis Toolbox and RAG memory for closed-loop search. Under the same limited iteration budget, Beacon reduces the composite latency-energy-monetary-cost objective by 25.1\%--93.5\% compared with random search, Bayesian optimization, and reinforcement learning.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Boyu Li, Zongwei Zhu, Qianyue Cao, Xi Li, Xuehai Zhou. 2026-08-31. Beacon: LLM Multi-Agent Driven Hardware Design Space Exploration for Heterogeneous Multi-Chiplet Deep Learning Accelerators. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.30932

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Are Widely Known Findings Easier to Retract?

Failures of retraction are common in science. Why do they occur? And what determines whether a retraction is successful? We use data from citation records and Altmetrics to test proposed answers to these questions. LaCroix et al. employ network models to argue the social spread of information helps explain failures of retraction. One prediction is that widely known results, surprisingly, should be easier to retract, since their retraction is more relevant. Our results support this conclusion. We find highly cited papers show more significant reductions in citation after retraction and garner more attention to their retractions as they occur.

cs.DL

Are We There Yet? Assessing Computer-Use Agents for Blind Users' Accessible Interaction with Desktop Applications

Computer-use agents are emerging as a paradigm for agentic human-AI interaction, combining language reasoning with multi-modal interface grounding to operate GUIs. Yet their effectiveness for blind screen-reader users in real-world desktop workflows remains unclear. We present a three-week diary study with 8 blind users using OLLA, a screen-reader-accessible CUA prototype, collecting 1,258 commands across 12 applications with screenshots, UI trees, model responses, and action traces. We evaluate GPT-5 during deployment and re-execute the same commands with four additional models. GPT-5 achieved the highest success rate at 52.5%. Trace analysis reveals grounding, planning, constraint-tracking, and termination failures, while interviews reveal beyond-automation needs.

cs.HC

Self-Reports Are Not Verification: Environment-Grounded Auditing of LLM Operators in Evolutionary Search

Language model agents increasingly propose actions, observe external feedback, and explain their own behavior. Their confidence and rationales are convenient monitoring signals, but convenience is not verification. We introduce an environment-grounded audit in which every intermediate proposal receives an exact outcome. A language model operates an evolutionary Contexto search whose feedback function assigns every valid guess an exact rank without human annotation. Across 200 runs spanning five configurations and three model families, four reporting configurations produce 12,249 self-reports. We test three assumptions: stated confidence is calibrated, inherited rationales affect later proposals, and fitness-based selection improves report quality. All three fail. Operators overstate top-100 success by factors of 4.8 to 9.3, while calibration and discrimination dissociate across model families. Controlled interventions on 754 inherited rationales bound any measured benefit of the genuine rationale to roughly 250 ranks. Neither fitness-based nor random selection produces a detectable selection differential or parent-to-offspring transmission in report accuracy, despite sharply different search behavior. Agent self-reports should therefore be treated as claims to verify against the environment, not as evidence of their own reliability.

cs.AI