Update on Overleaf.

1 files changed, 24 insertions, 21 deletions

diff --git a/eval.tex b/eval.tex
index 03d1357..49e39c5 100644
--- a/eval.tex
+++ b/eval.tex
@@ -4,30 +4,29 @@
 \definecolor{intel}{HTML}{beaed4}
 \definecolor{legup}{HTML}{fdc086}
 \begin{figure}
-  \resizebox{0.47\textwidth}{!}{%
-    \begin{tikzpicture}
+  \centering
+    \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.61]
       \draw (-14.5,7.65) rectangle (0,-1);
       \fill[vivado,fill opacity=0.5] (-4.4,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
       \fill[intel,fill opacity=0.5] (-10.2,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
       \fill[legup,fill opacity=0.5] (-7.3,2) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
-      \draw[white] (-4.4,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75); % making the
-      \draw[white] (-10.2,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75); % outlines
-      \draw[white] (-7.3,2) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);    % fully opaque
-      \node[align=center] at (-10.2,6.3) {\Large\textsf{\textbf{Xilinx Vivado HLS}} \\ \Large\textsf{\textbf{v2019.1}}};
-      \node at (-4.4,6.3) {\Large\textsf{\textbf{Intel i++ 18.1}}};
-      \node at (-7.3,0) {\Large\textsf{\textbf{LegUp 4.0}}};
-
-      \node at (-5.5,3) {\Huge 1 (\textcolor{red}{1})};
-      \node at (-9.1,3) {\Huge 4 (\textcolor{red}{0})};
-      \node at (-3,5) {\Huge 26 (\textcolor{red}{540})};
-      \node at (-11.6,5) {\Huge 79 (\textcolor{red}{20})};
-      \node at (-7.3,1) {\Huge 162 (\textcolor{red}{6})};
-      \node at (-7.3,5.2) {\Huge 0 (\textcolor{red}{5})};
-      \node at (-7.3,3.8) {\Huge 0 (\textcolor{red}{0})};
-      \node at (-13.6,-0.5) {\Huge 5856};
+      \draw[white, thick] (-4.4,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
+      \draw[white, thick] (-10.2,4.4) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
+      \draw[white, thick] (-7.3,2) ellipse (3.75 and 2.75);
+      \node[align=center, anchor=north] at (-10.2,6.5) {\textsf{\textbf{Xilinx Vivado HLS}} \\ \textsf{\textbf{v2019.1}}};
+      \node[anchor=north] at (-4.4,6.5) {\textsf{\textbf{Intel i++ 18.1}}};
+      \node at (-7.3,0) {\textsf{\textbf{LegUp 4.0}}};
+
+      \node at (-5.5,3) {1 (\textcolor{red}{1})};
+      \node at (-9.1,3) {4 (\textcolor{red}{0})};
+      \node at (-3,4.1) {26 (\textcolor{red}{540})};
+      \node at (-11.6,4.1) {79 (\textcolor{red}{20})};
+      \node at (-7.3,1) {162 (\textcolor{red}{6})};
+      \node at (-7.3,5.1) {0 (\textcolor{red}{5})};
+      \node at (-7.3,3.9) {0 (\textcolor{red}{0})};
+      \node at (-13.6,-0.5) {5856};
     \end{tikzpicture}
-  }
-\caption{A Venn diagram showing the number of failures in each tool out of 6700 test-cases that were run.  Overlapping regions mean that the test-cases failed in all those tools.  The numbers in parentheses represent the number of test-cases that timed out.}\label{fig:existing_tools}
+\caption{A Venn diagram showing the number of failures in each tool out of 6700 test-cases that were run. Overlapping regions mean that the test-cases failed in multiple tools.  The numbers in parentheses represent the number of test-cases that timed out.}\label{fig:existing_tools}
 \end{figure}
 
 \begin{table}
@@ -40,7 +39,7 @@
     Intel i++ & $\ge 1$\\
     \bottomrule
   \end{tabular}
-  \caption{Unique bugs found in each tool.  The ``$\ge$'' sign signifies a lower bound on the number of unique bugs found and correspond to unique test cases after reduction.  %\JW{is `all versions' correct here? and should we add version numbers like in the Venn?}\YH{Yes it is actually correct here, I don't mind adding the specific version either though}\JW{Ok let's leave it as-is.}
+  \caption{Unique bugs found in each tool.  The ``$\ge$'' sign signifies a lower bound on the number of unique bugs found after test-case reduction.  %\JW{is `all versions' correct here? and should we add version numbers like in the Venn?}\YH{Yes it is actually correct here, I don't mind adding the specific version either though}\JW{Ok let's leave it as-is.}
   }
   \label{tab:unique_bugs}
 \end{table}
@@ -80,7 +79,7 @@ Interestingly, as an indicator of reliability of HLS tools, the blue ribbon show
 \definecolor{ribbon6}{HTML}{fdb462}
 \begin{figure}
   \centering
-  \begin{tikzpicture}
+  \begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=1.25]
     \draw[white, fill=ribbon1] (-1.0,4.1) -- (0.0,4.1000000000000005) to [out=0,in=180] (2.0,4.1000000000000005) to [out=0,in=180] (4.0,4.1000000000000005) -- (6.0,4.1000000000000005) -- %(7.55,3.325) -- 
     (6.0,2.5500000000000003) -- (4.0,2.5500000000000003) to [out=180,in=0] (2.0,2.5500000000000003) to [out=180,in=0] (0.0,2.5500000000000003) -- (-1.0,2.55) -- cycle;
     \draw[white, fill=ribbon2] (-1.0,2.55) -- (0.0,2.5500000000000003) to [out=0,in=180] (2.0,1.8) to [out=0,in=180] (4.0,1.55) -- (6.0,1.55) -- %(7.3,0.9) -- 
@@ -210,6 +209,10 @@ int main() {
 \caption{An output mismatch: Vivado HLS returns \texttt{0x0} but the correct result is \texttt{0xF}.}\label{fig:eval:vivado:mismatch}
 \end{figure}
 
+\subsubsection{Intel i++ miscompilation}
+
+\JW{Write about one of the Intel bugs here.}
+
 
 
 %%% Local Variables: