You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
A large semantic gap between the high-level synthesis (HLS) design and the low-level (on-board or RTL) simulation environment often creates a barrier for those who are not FPGA experts. Moreover, such low-level simulation takes a long time to complete. Software-based HLS simulators can help bridge this gap and accelerate the simulation process; however, we found that the current FPGA HLS commercial software simulators sometimes produce incorrect results. In order to solve this correctness issue while maintaining the high speed of a software-based simulator, this paper proposes a new HLS simulation flow named FLASH. The main idea behind the proposed flow is to extract the scheduling information from the HLS tool and automatically construct an equivalent cycle-accurate simulation model while preserving C semantics. Experimental results show that FLASH runs three orders of magnitude faster than the RTL simulation.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: High-level synthesis (HLS) tools have vastly increased the productivity of field-programmable gate array (FPGA) programmers with design automation and abstraction. However, the side effect is that many architectural details are hidden from the programmers. As a result, programmers who wish to improve the performance of their design often have difficulty identifying the performance bottleneck. It is true that current HLS tools provide some estimate of the performance with a fixed loop count, but they often fail to do so for programs with input-dependent execution behavior. Also, their external memory latency model does not accurately fit the actual bus-based shared memory architecture. This work describes a high-level cycle estimation methodology to solve these problems. To reduce the time overhead, we propose a cycle estimation process that is combined with the HLS software simulation. We also present an automatic code instrumentation technique that finds the reason for stall accurately in on-board execution. The experimental results show that our framework provides a cycle estimate with an average error rate of 1.1 and 5.0 for compute- and DRAM-bound modules, respectively, for ADM-PCIE-7V3 board. The proposed method is about two orders of magnitude faster than the FPGA bitstream generation.

[2]: Embedded system designers can achieve energy and performance benefits by using dedicated hardware accelerators. However, implementing custom hardware accelerators for an application can be difficult and time intensive. LegUp is an open-source high-level synthesis framework that simplifies the hardware accelerator design process [8]. With LegUp, a designer can start from an embedded application running on a processor and incrementally migrate portions of the program to hardware accelerators implemented on an FPGA. The final application then executes on an automatically-generated software hardware coprocessor system. This paper presents on overview of the LegUp design methodology and system architecture, and discusses ongoing work on profiling, hardware software partitioning, hardware accelerator quality improvements, Pthreads OpenMP support, visualization tools, and debugging support.
There are also other HLS-based software simulators. The LegUp HLS [2] simulator provides speedup prediction based on the profiling of the source code and the execution cycle from its synthesis result. HLScope+ [1] describes a method to extract cycle information that is hidden by HLS abstraction and uses Vivado HLS C simulation to predict the performance for applications with dynamic behavior. These works, however, do not guarantee cycle-accuracy.