# Area and Performance Estimates of Finite State Machines in Reconfigurable Systems
## 2 Related Works
### Estimates of FSMs
#### 3.2.3 Other Estimates for FSMs
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**FSM**} & _e\_FPGA_ & _classic_ & _diff\_w_ & _max\_w_ & _seq\_dec_ & _par\_dec_ & _avg\_dec_ \\  & _Fmax/F1_ & _Fmax/F2_ & _Fmax/F3_ & _Fmax/F4_ & _Fmax/F5_ & _Fmax/F6_ & _Fmax/F7_ \\ \hline bbara & 1.230 & 1.000 & 1.278 & 1.168 & 1.230 & 1.230 & 1.230 \\ bbsse & 1.102 & 1.066 & 1.112 & 1.023 & 1.000 & 1.116 & 1.000 \\ beecount & 1.000 & 1.002 & 1.053 & 1.002 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ cse & 1.084 & 1.000 & 1.077 & 1.003 & 1.084 & 1.084 & 1.084 \\ dk14 & 1.260 & 1.362 & 1.000 & 1.203 & 1.260 & 1.260 & 1.260 \\ dk15 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.092 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ dk16 & 1.061 & 1.073 & 1.000 & 1.519 & 1.061 & 1.061 & 1.061 \\ dk17 & 1.099 & 1.000 & 1.001 & 1.100 & 1.099 & 1.099 & 1.099 \\ dk512 & 1.131 & 1.022 & 1.023 & 1.000 & 1.131 & 1.131 & 1.131 \\ ex1 & 1.069 & 1.104 & 1.104 & 1.059 & 1.069 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ ex4 & 1.175 & 1.000 & 1.387 & 1.099 & 1.175 & 1.175 & 1.175 \\ ex5 & 1.034 & 1.000 & 1.032 & 1.085 & 1.034 & 1.034 & 1.034 \\ ex6 & 1.063 & 1.140 & 1.000 & 1.071 & 1.063 & 1.063 & 1.063 \\ ex7 & 1.167 & 1.000 & 1.439 & 1.131 & 1.167 & 1.167 & 1.167 \\ keyb & 1.040 & 1.018 & 1.249 & 1.000 & 1.036 & 1.036 & 1.036 \\ lion9 & 1.000 & 1.083 & 1.380 & 1.050 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ planet & 1.025 & 1.055 & 1.064 & 1.000 & 1.060 & 1.042 & 1.060 \\ planet1 & 1.025 & 1.055 & 1.064 & 1.000 & 1.060 & 1.042 & 1.060 \\ pma & 1.242 & 1.131 & 1.126 & 1.045 & 1.112 & 1.000 & 1.112 \\ s1 & 1.062 & 1.004 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.062 & 1.062 & 1.062 \\ s1488 & 1.017 & 1.000 & 1.072 & 1.026 & 1.053 & 1.053 & 1.053 \\ s1494 & 1.068 & 1.000 & 1.136 & 1.026 & 1.009 & 1.009 & 1.009 \\ s298 & 1.000 & 1.058 & 1.016 & 1.049 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ s386 & 1.085 & 1.011 & 1.181 & 1.000 & 1.042 & 1.042 & 1.042 \\ s510 & 1.212 & 1.232 & 1.341 & 1.257 & 1.300 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ s820 & 1.016 & 1.033 & 1.060 & 1.074 & 1.069 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ se32 & 1.153 & 1.073 & 1.008 & 1.000 & 1.056 & 1.128 & 1.128 \\ sand & 1.000 & 1.061 & 1.080 & 1.066 & 1.000 & 1.000 & 1.000 \\ se & 1.102 & 1.066 & 1.112 & 1.023 & 1.000 & 1.116 & 1.000 \\ styr & 1.037 & 1.033 & 1.087 & 1.000 & 1.037 & 1.037 & 1.037 \\ tbk & 1.073 & 1.000 & 1.035 & 1.096 & 1.073 & 1.073 & 1.073 \\ tma & 1.086 & 1.000 & 1.109 & 1.086 & 1.098 & 1.086 & 1.098 \\ train11 & 1.191 & 1.149 & 1.000 & 1.104 & 1.191 & 1.191 & 1.191 \\ _Av_ & 1.088 & 1.055 & 1.113 & 1.072 & 1.080 & 1.071 & 1.069 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: Comparison of FSM performance using different estimates with the best solution _Fmax_. unique solution. Of the _avg_dec_, _par_dec_, and _seq_dec_ estimates, only one _avg_dec_ estimate can be applied because it achieves the largest number of best solutions. Figure 4 shows the graphs of the efficiency of the considered estimates in terms of performance. Here, the estimates are assigned place numbers by the average performance value (_Average_) according to the order given above, with _classic_ estimate having the highest number 7, and _diff_w_ estimate having the lowest number 1. Figure 4 shows that the ranking in terms of average performance value (_Average_) approximately corresponds to the number of best solutions (_Best_). ### Comparison of the Sequential State Coding Method Using Presented Estimates with Known Methods

To verify the effectiveness of the proposed estimates, let us compare the results of the sequential method (_s_method_) with simple binary coding (_seq_code_ method), the Sequential mode of the Quartus system (_Quartus_ method), and the JEDI program [21] (_JEDI_ method).