FI Systems, CorpEfficiency is Everything

APPLICATIONS / RESULTS, COSTS AND FIT

Product evidence.

The studies below explore lighter equipment, more time between charges and less electricity used for the same work. Each linked comparison shows its results, assumptions and added costs.

COMPATIBLE METHODS / PRODUCT FIT

The budget for each product.

Current application budgets and the finite reference models related to each target.

TargetWhat mattersCurrent budgetRelated complete-job model
Precision sensingQuality, energy and reading cost3.25–23.04% less modeled sensing energy

Eight selected cases versus equal reading counts; readings use 50% of energy and planning costs 3%. Exact conventional planners match the reading counts. A ninth case saves 1.17%; three equal-noise cases use 3% more.

Sensing-energy model.

Eight selected reading-plan cases save 3.25–23.04% modeled sensing energy versus equal counts after the added planning cost. Exact conventional planners match the reading counts.

Related model results: D120: 33.25% longer completion; 1.4747% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D120.

Rugged field computersBattery, weight, heat and deadlinesProduct budget open.In the main modeled case, the defined seismic data-processing job uses 0.08617% less energy.

Related model results: D118: 4.07% longer completion; 0.8152% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D118.

Solar controlHousekeeping power, charge quality and protectionProduct budget open.At the main modeled operating point, the solar comparisons use the same energy as the strongest conventional controls tested.

Related model jobs: D001, D002, D003, D004, D005.

Orbital flight computingPower, heat path, fault recovery and deadlinesProduct budget open.The defined payload-data reporting job uses 0.05941% less energy in its main modeled case. The other spacecraft comparisons use the same energy as their conventional controls.

Related model results: D043: 3.95% longer completion; 0.9803% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D043, D042, D045, D046.

Portable communications and recordersPower, weight, required coverage and complete records19.97% less combined recorder/input-history storage

1,453,784,064→1,163,480,256 bytes for the reviewed design boundary. Writes fall 10.71%, reads 17.65%, timing-record checksum steps 60% on separate axes.

Conditional design arithmetic; original full-service qualification remains open.

At the main modeled operating point, the Wi-Fi task uses 0.2563% less energy and the public-safety evidence-recorder task uses 0.03085% less than their strongest conventional controls.

Related model results: D027: 51.49% longer completion; 0.4356% more energy at its worst tested condition; D099: 3.95% longer completion; 0.5095% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D027, D099.

Phones and mobile devicesSize, weight, heat and compute; radio and battery service0.65–4.61% less whole-phone energy in an illustration

Sensing uses 20% of phone energy, other 80% stays fixed and no further costs are added. Same-battery life rises 0.65–4.83%. Exact conventional allocation planners match the reading counts.

Worked phone-energy budget.

The sensing illustration assumes a 20% phone-energy share and no further costs. Exact conventional planners match the reading counts. Separate wearable and Wi-Fi reference jobs save 0.12418% and 0.25626% nominal modeled energy.

Related model results: D027: 51.49% longer completion; 0.4356% more energy at its worst tested condition; D037: 28.70% shorter completion; 1.1896% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D027, D037.

Telephone towers and cellsite radiosPower drawn, heat and required coverageProduct budget open.D021 has no candidate that meets its constraints. D022 has a selected capability but no conventional baseline meeting the comparison constraints. Both cellsite comparisons remain unmatched.

Related model jobs: D021, D022, D023, D024, D025.

Industrial computing and controlEnergy, control quality, faults and deadlinesProduct budget open.In the main modeled cases, the magnetic-bearing control task uses 0.01029% less energy and brushless-motor control uses 0.00354% less. The other listed industrial comparisons use the same energy as their conventional controls.

Related model results: D019: 43.01% longer completion; 0.2022% more energy at its worst tested condition; D015: 37.37% longer completion; 0.0679% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D015, D019, D061, D062, D063, D064, D065.

Engineering softwareExact output, time, memory and complete logsProduct budget open.Engineering reference models tie the strongest tested ordinary controls at nominal. In the separate API pilot, gmpy2 led all 26 preserved timing groups. The report-cache design removes 737,280 expression evaluations.

Related model jobs: D066, D081, D082, D083, D084.

RF and microwave amplifiers, satellite ground terminals and QNUK

RF/microwave amplifier modeling

In the main modeled case, D030 waveform correction uses 0.03084% less energy per job but takes 65.84% longer. Several other RF comparisons remain unmatched.

Related model results: D030: 65.84% longer completion; 0.0968% more energy at its worst tested condition. No winner saved energy across the required robustness cases.

Related model jobs: D030, D021, D026, D028, D041.

QNUK

At the main modeled point, D114 random-token computation uses the same energy as the strongest conventional control.

Related model jobs: D114.

Satellite ground terminals

Ground-terminal link, receiver/transmitter, power and heat budgets remain open. Orbital references use separate fault and thermal conditions.

A matched joint application budget remains open.

WHO WE BUILD FOR

For equipment and software teams.

These studies ask how equipment could weigh less, use less power or repeat fewer calculations while doing the same required work.

EQUIPMENT DEVELOPERS & INTEGRATORS

Defense

Portable equipment and field computing

The goal is a lighter field kit or more time in use, with its required functions kept intact.

  • Portable equipment: the comparison keeps the same job and runtime. Lower net energy demand could allow a smaller battery.
  • Vehicle-mounted equipment: support electronics use vehicle power and need cooling. The study looks for lower draw and heat at the same required service.
  • Scanning, spoofing and jamming platforms: the comparison counts computing, storage and cooling overhead at the required output, coverage, timing and duty cycle.
Portable sensing and communicationsField-computing design outcomes
MANUFACTURERS, AUTOMATION & ENTERPRISE TEAMS

Industry & Corporate

Factory and corporate workloads

We study electricity use, cooling and repeated calculations at the same required output.

  • Machines and control cabinets: the comparison keeps machine output fixed and follows source power, heat and control timing.
  • Inspection and remote monitoring: the saved model counts the energy from fewer readings and added planning at the original quality limit.
  • Corporate engineering: reusing calculations and reducing repeated data handling could leave more processing capacity for other jobs.
Industrial computing and controlInspection and precision sensingCorporate engineering workflows
DEVICE, COMMUNICATIONS & SOFTWARE TEAMS

Commercial

Battery life and product size

The design choice is longer battery life or smaller hardware, with added processing and parts included.

  • Battery-powered products: a net energy saving has two possible uses: keep the battery and run longer, or reduce its capacity and keep the original runtime.
  • Telecom and solar electronics: the studies cover controller background power, radio processing and the costs of adding those methods.
  • Embedded products: chip and cooling size depend on peak demand and the space available in the layout.
Mobile and connected productsSolar control electronicsTelecom electronics

Products remain in development. Each linked application calculation gives its model inputs, added costs and design choices.

See the size, weight, power and heat calculations

Design results.

In the proposed recorder design, the space set aside for the recorder alone falls 25.18%. Capture writes use 10.71% fewer bytes, and reads use 17.65% fewer bytes. Selected reading models and conditional calculations for supporting-hardware mass are separate comparisons.

Research evidence

Reference applications

Published hardware specifications and related task models for each application.

Another task?

Other electronics research includes the design of external, non-patient medical devices, with application-specific operating, safety and validation requirements.

Discuss an application study