Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Several types of Decision Diagrams (DDs) have have been proposed in the area of Computer Aided Design (CAD), among them being bit-level DDs like OBDDs, OFDDs and OKFDDs. While the aforementioned types of DDs are suitable for representing Boolean functions at the bit-level and have proved useful for a lot of applications in CAD, recently DDs to represent integer-valued functions, like MTBDDs (=ADDs), EVBDDs, FEVBDDs, (*)BMDs, HDDs (=KBMDs), and K*BMDs, attract more and more interest, e.g., using *BMDs it was for the first time possible to verify multipliers of bit length up to n=256.   clarify the representational por of these DD classes. Several (inclusion) relations and (exponential) gaps beten specific classes differing in the availability of additive and/or multiplicative edge ights and in the choice of decomposition types are shown. It turns out for example, that K(*)BMDs, a generalization of OKFDDs to the word-level, also "include" OBDDs, MTBDDs and (*)BMDs. On the other hand, it is demonstrated that a restriction of the K(*)BMD concept to subclasses, such as OBDDs, MTBDDs, (*)BMDs as ll, results in families of functions which lose their efficient representation.
['Bernd Becker', 'Rolf Drechsler', 'Reinhard Enders']
I am writing a research paper on a idea On the representational power of bit-level and word-level decision diagrams
[{"from": "human", "value": "I am writing a research paper on a idea On the representational power of bit-level and word-level decision diagrams"}, {"from": "gpt", "value": "Thats a unique idea.You should consider the following idea to enhance your idea so that it would impact uniquely: Several types of Decision Diagrams (DDs) have have been proposed in the area of Computer Aided Design (CAD), among them being bit-level DDs like OBDDs, OFDDs and OKFDDs. While the aforementioned types of DDs are suitable for representing Boolean functions at the bit-level and have proved useful for a lot of applications in CAD, recently DDs to represent integer-valued functions, like MTBDDs (=ADDs), EVBDDs, FEVBDDs, (*)BMDs, HDDs (=KBMDs), and K*BMDs, attract more and more interest, e.g., using *BMDs it was for the first time possible to verify multipliers of bit length up to n=256.   clarify the representational por of these DD classes. Several (inclusion) relations and (exponential) gaps beten specific classes differing in the availability of additive and/or multiplicative edge ights and in the choice of decomposition types are shown. It turns out for example, that K(*)BMDs, a generalization of OKFDDs to the word-level, also \"include\" OBDDs, MTBDDs and (*)BMDs. On the other hand, it is demonstrated that a restriction of the K(*)BMD concept to subclasses, such as OBDDs, MTBDDs, (*)BMDs as ll, results in families of functions which lose their efficient representation."}]