Workflows vs Agents for Code Translation
This addresses the resource-intensive need for deploying algorithms on FPGAs/ASICs, though it appears incremental as it focuses on improving syntax repair within an existing pipeline.
The paper tackles the problem of automating MATLAB-to-HDL code translation using LLMs, which often produce syntax errors due to limited HDL training, by comparing structured workflows with autonomous agentic approaches; the agentic method, using dynamic tool selection, resolves more syntax errors and increases simulation success rates by over 20 percentage points for mid-sized models.
Translating algorithms from high-level languages like MATLAB to hardware description languages (HDLs) is a resource-intensive but necessary step for deployment on FPGAs and ASICs. While large language models (LLMs) offer a path to automation, their limited training on HDL code makes end-to-end transpilation brittle and prone to syntax errors. We compare two LLM-driven methods for syntax repair in a MATLAB-to-HDL pipeline: a structured, expert-designed flow that follows a fixed sequence of operations, and a more autonomous agentic approach that uses the Model Context Protocol (MCP) \cite{anthropic2024mcp} to dynamically select its own tools. We study 42 MATLAB signal-processing functions and isolate the syntax-repair stage. Across three model scales, the agentic approach is more effective at resolving initial syntax errors, unblocking a greater number of candidates to proceed through the pipeline. This upstream improvement yields measurable downstream improvements, most notably on mid-sized models, where it increases the simulation reach rate by over 20 percentage points. We hypothesize the gains come from short prompts, aggressive context management, and conditional tool use. Conditional retrieval helps at 8B and 30B; at 235B final-success gains are small and a naive RAG variant attains the highest final success. Our findings suggest that these agentic frameworks, when properly designed, are most effective at compensating for the capacity limits of small and mid-sized models.