Embedded Image Processing Design Trade Sample Clauses

Embedded Image Processing Design Trade offs Ideally, embedded image processing systems should have high performance, dissipate min- imal power, and cost as little as possible – a classic case of conflicting objectives. Thus, implementing an efficient image processing application requires carefully trading off different alternatives. In summary, the following aspects need to be considered: • Power and energy requirements: Embedded systems are often limited by battery life, but even when the product has access to the electrical grid it can be limited by the thermal dissipation within the heat sink, the cabinet or the packaging. Therefore, en- ergy consumption, power dissipation, and thermal issues commonly place restrictions on the implementation of image processing systems. • Performance: Image processing applications tend to require more and more perfor- xxxxx to deal with the large data sets provided by newer sensors. This creates a push for more powerful compute platforms – as this makes it easier for software developers to meet performance requirements. • Non-Recurrent Costs (NRCs): NRCs are costs incurred during the development of the product. Higher NRCs might not be a problem when you develop a high-volume product, but for low-volume products care must be taken to reduce NRCs since they may significantly increase the price of the product. • Recurrent Costs (RC): RCs are costs incurred during the production phase of the product and strongly depends on the choices made at design time – as more expensive components means higher prices. Higher RCs will always impact the final product price, but unlike the NRC you have to take greater care with high-volume products as each cent saved on a product can lead to millions gained in revenue. A trade-off does not mean the hardware designer has to find a solution that matches all con- straints. Commonly, the designer needs to discuss the constraints and move the thresholds. If all the functionalities cannot be implemented, the designer can see if it is possible to re- move some of them or reduce the effectiveness or the accuracy of the functions within certain margins. Reducing the accuracy by 1% to 2% might in some case reduce the load by several tens of percentage points and allow for using smaller and cheaper components.