The present invention relates to the field of performing basket calculation operations based on streaming data, particularly streaming financial market data.
The following paragraphs provide several definitions for various terms used herein. These paragraphs also provide background information relating to these terms.
Financial Instrument: As used herein, a “financial instrument” refers to a contract representing an equity ownership, debt, or credit, typically in relation to a corporate or governmental entity, wherein the contract is saleable. Examples of financial instruments include stocks, bonds, commodities, currency traded on currency markets, etc. but would not include cash or checks in the sense of how those items are used outside the financial trading markets (i.e., the purchase of groceries at a grocery store using cash or check would not be covered by the term “financial instrument” as used herein; similarly, the withdrawal of $100 in cash from an Automatic Teller Machine using a debit card would not be covered by the term “financial instrument” as used herein).
Financial Market Data: As used herein, the term “financial market data” refers to data contained in or derived from a series of messages that individually represent a new offer to buy or sell a financial instrument, an indication of a completed sale of a financial instrument, notifications of corrections to previously-reported sales of a financial instrument, administrative messages related to such transactions, and the like.
Basket: As used herein, the term “basket” refers to a collection comprising a plurality of elements, each element having one or more values. The collection may be assigned one or more Net Values (NVs), wherein a NV is derived from the values of the plurality of elements in the collection. For example, a basket may be a collection of data points from various scientific experiments. Each data point may have associated values such as size, mass, etc. One may derive a size NV by computing a weighted sum of the sizes, a mass NV by computing a weighted sum of the masses, etc. Another example of a basket would be a collection of financial instruments, as explained below.
Financial Instrument Basket: As used herein, the term “financial instrument basket” refers to a basket whose elements comprise financial instruments. The financial instrument basket may be assigned one or more Net Asset Values (NAVs), wherein a NAV is derived from the values of the elements in the basket. Examples of financial instruments that may be included in baskets are securities (stocks), bonds, options, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, etc. Financial instrument baskets may represent standard indexes, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), mutual funds, personal portfolios, etc. One may derive a last sale NAV by computing a weighted sum of the last sale prices for each of the financial instruments in the basket, a bid NAV by computing a weighted sum of the current best bid prices for each of the financial instruments in the basket, etc.
GPP: As used herein, the term “general-purpose processor” (or GPP) refers to a hardware device having a fixed form and whose functionality is variable, wherein this variable functionality is defined by fetching instructions and executing those instructions, of which a conventional central processing unit (CPU) is a common example. Exemplary embodiments of GPPs include an Intel Xeon processor and an AMD Opteron processor.
Reconfigurable Logic: As used herein, the term “reconfigurable logic” refers to any logic technology whose form and function can be significantly altered (i.e., reconfigured) in the field post-manufacture. This is to be contrasted with a GPP, whose function can change post-manufacture, but whose form is fixed at manufacture.
Software: As used herein, the term “software” refers to data processing functionality that is deployed on a GPP or other processing devices, wherein software cannot be used to change or define the form of the device on which it is loaded.
Firmware: As used herein, the term “firmware” refers to data processing functionality that is deployed on reconfigurable logic or other processing devices, wherein firmware may be used to change or define the form of the device on which it is loaded.
Coprocessor: As used herein, the term “coprocessor” refers to a computational engine designed to operate in conjunction with other components in a computational system having a main processor (wherein the main processor itself may comprise multiple processors such as in a multi-core processor architecture). Typically, a coprocessor is optimized to perform a specific set of tasks and is used to offload tasks from a main processor (which is typically a GPP) in order to optimize system performance. The scope of tasks performed by a coprocessor may be fixed or variable, depending on the architecture of the coprocessor. Examples of fixed coprocessor architectures include Graphics Processor Units which perform a broad spectrum of tasks and floating point numeric coprocessors which perform a relatively narrow set of tasks. Examples of reconfigurable coprocessor architectures include reconfigurable logic devices such as Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) which may be reconfigured to implement a wide variety of fixed or programmable computational engines. The functionality of a coprocessor may be defined via software and/or firmware.
Hardware Acceleration: As used herein, the term “hardware acceleration” refers to the use of software and/or firmware implemented on a coprocessor for offloading one or more processing tasks from a main processor to decrease processing latency for those tasks relative to the main processor.
Bus: As used herein, the term “bus” refers to a logical bus which encompasses any physical interconnect for which devices and locations are accessed by an address. Examples of buses that could be used in the practice of the present invention include, but are not limited to the PCI family of buses (e.g., PCI-X and PCI-Express) and HyperTransport buses.
Pipelining: As used herein, the terms “pipeline”, “pipelined sequence”, or “chain” refer to an arrangement of application modules wherein the output of one application module is connected to the input of the next application module in the sequence. This pipelining arrangement allows each application module to independently operate on any data it receives during a given clock cycle and then pass its output to the next downstream application module in the sequence during another clock cycle.
The ability to closely track the value of financial instrument baskets throughout a trading day as large volumes of events, such as trades and quotes, are constantly occurring is a daunting task. Every trade made on a financial instrument which is part of the portfolio of financial instruments underlying a financial instrument basket will potentially cause a change in that basket's value. The inventors herein believe that conventional techniques used to compute basket values have been unable to keep up with the high volume of events affecting basket values, thereby leading to inaccuracy for financial instrument basket values relative to the current state of the market because, with conventional techniques, the currently computed basket value will not be reflective of current market conditions, but rather market conditions as they existed anywhere from milliseconds to several seconds in the past.
As noted above, financial instrument baskets may represent standard indexes, ETFs, mutual funds, personal portfolios, etc.
An index represents the performance of a group of companies, wherein the group can be decided by various criteria such as market capitalization (e.g., the S&P 500), industry (e.g., the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA)), etc.
A mutual fund is a professionally-managed form of collective investment wherein the buyer pays the fund owner a certain amount of money and in exchange receives shares of the fund.
ETFs are very similar to mutual funds with an important difference being that ETFs can be traded continuously throughout the trading day on an exchange, just like stocks. Therefore, the prices of ETFs fluctuate not only according to the changes in their underlying portfolios, but also due to changes in market supply and demand for the ETFs' shares themselves. Thus, ETFs provide the trading dynamics of stocks as well as the diversity of mutual funds. Additionally, ETFs typically track a well-established market index, trying to replicate the returns of the index.
Personal portfolios are groupings of financial instruments that are defined by an individual for his/her personal investment goals.
A financial instrument basket is defined by its set of underlying financial instruments. The basket definition also specifies a weight for each of the financial instruments within the basket. For example, consider a hypothetical basket denoted by B. Basket B contains M financial instruments with symbols Ci, wherein i=1, 2, . . . , M. Further, the weights of each financial instrument i in the basket is denoted by wi, wherein i=1, 2, . . . , M. Associated with a basket is a measure of its monetary value known as its net asset value (NAV). If one assumes that the value at the current instant of each financial instrument i within basket B is Ti, wherein i=1, 2, . . . , M, then the NAV of basket B can be computed as:
wherein d is a divisor that is associated with the basket and discussed in greater detail hereinafter. Thus, equation (1) specifies that a basket's NAV is the weighted sum of the worth of the financial instruments within the baskets, wherein the divisor acts as a normalizing factor.
The value of T represents a price for the financial instrument's shares. The price can be expressed as the last sale/trade price (last), the best offer to buy price (bid), the best offer to sell price (ask), or specific offer prices to buy or sell (limit orders).
The value of w can be defined differently for each basket. For example, with capitalization-weighted indexes (such as the S&P 500), the weight of the financial instrument can be defined as the number of outstanding shares of the financial instrument multiplied by a “free-float” factor, wherein the free-float factor is a number between 0 and 1 that adjusts for the fact that certain shares of the financial instrument are not publicly available for trading. With an equal-weighted index (such as the DJIA), the weight of a financial instrument is set to 1. With ETFs and personal portfolios, the weight of a financial instrument can be set equal to a specified number which reflects the fact that owning many shares for each of the basket's financial instruments amounts to owning one share of that ETF or personal portfolio. Thus, in order to own one share of basket B, one would have to purchase w1 shares of financial instrument C1, w2 shares of financial instrument C2, and so on up to wM shares of financial instrument CM.
The value of d can also be defined differently for each basket. For an index, the divisor can be set to the current index divisor, which can be either the number of financial instruments in the index (e.g., 500 for the S&P 500) or some other specified value. For ETFs, the divisor can change during the trading day (as the divisor can also do with respect to indexes).
As indicated above, whenever there is a change in worth for one of a basket's underlying financial instruments, then the NAV for that basket should be calculated in accordance with formula (1). However, financial market data messages from exchanges stream into a platform such as a ticker plant at very high rates. For example, the options price reporting authority (OPRA) expects that its message rate in January 2008 will be approximately 800,000 messages/second. Each of these messages may potentially trigger multiple NAV recalculations. Moreover, because the same financial instrument may be a member of several baskets, the inventors herein estimate that, in order to track basket NAV values for all financial market data messages, the number of NAV calculations that will need to be performed every second will be at least on the order of 10 million NAV calculations/second. The inventors herein believe that conventional solutions are unable to keep up with such high update rates due to the serial nature of the conventional solutions, which constrain it to perform only one update at a time (including other tasks that a system may need to perform unrelated to basket calculations).
This shortcoming is problematic because it is highly desirable for financial traders to be able to calculate the basket NAVs extremely fast. An example will illustrate this desirability. As explained above, ETFs are baskets which can be traded like regular stocks on an exchange. The portfolio for an ETF is defined at the beginning of the trading day and remains fixed throughout the trading day barring rare events. Shares of ETFs can be created throughout the trading day by a creation process which works as follows. A buyer gives the owner of a fund the specified portfolio of financial instruments that make up the ETF and a cash payment in an amount equal to the dividend payments on those financial instruments (and possibly a transaction fee). The fund then issues shares of the ETF to the buyer. Shares of ETFs can also be redeemed for the underlying financial instruments in a similar manner: the investor gives the fund owner shares of the ETF (and possibly some cash as a transaction fee), and in return the investor receives the portfolio of financial instruments that make up the ETF and cash equal to the dividend payments on those financial instruments.
During the trading day, the price of the shares of the ETF fluctuates according to supply and demand, and the ETF's NAV changes according to the supply and demand of the financial instruments in the ETF's portfolio. It may well happen that, during the trading day, the trading price of the ETF deviates from its NAV. If the price of the ETF is higher than the NAV, then the ETF is said to be trading “at a premium”. If the price of the ETF is lower than the NAV, then the ETF is said to be trading “at a discount”. If a financial trader detects a discrepancy between the ETF share price and the ETF NAV, then he/she can exploit that discrepancy to make a profit by way of arbitrage.
In one scenario, assume that the ETF share price, denoted by TETF, is higher than the ETF's NAV. In this case, a trader can execute the following steps:
In another scenario, assume that the ETF share price, denoted by TETF, is lower than the ETF's NAV. In this case, a trader can purchase an ETF share, redeem it for the shares of the financial instruments in the portfolio, and sell those financial instrument shares on the exchange. Once again, if the difference between TETF and the NAV is large enough to offset the transaction costs and other cash payments, then the trader can realize a profit at virtually no risk.
The crucial element in profiting from such riskless arbitrages for ETFs is detecting the difference between the ETF's share price and the ETF's NAV. The first trader to detect such discrepancies will stand to benefit the most, and the latency in NAV computation becomes important—the computation of the NAV should be performed as quickly as possible to beat competitors in the race toward detecting profit opportunities.
Independently of the ETF scenarios discussed above, another utility of basket NAV calculation is that the NAV provides a measure of how the basket's portfolio is faring. A steadily increasing NAV indicates that investing in more such baskets may be profitable. On the other hand, a decreasing NAV indicates that it may be desirable to sell the basket portfolio in order to avoid loss. This strategy is similar to ones that would be employed when trading in the shares of an individual financial instrument with the basket providing a benefit by mitigating risk through diversification across a portfolio of financial instruments (e.g., if the basket as a whole has an increasing NAV, then investing in that basket will be desirable independently of how any individual financial instrument in the basket is performing).
In an effort to satisfy a need in the art for high volume low latency basket value computations, the inventors herein disclose a technique for computing basket values for a set of baskets based on the data within a high speed data stream as that data streams through a processor.
According to one aspect of a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the inventors disclose a technique for computing basket values wherein a coprocessor is used to perform the basket calculations. By offloading the computational burden of the basket calculations to a coprocessor, the main processor for a system can be freed to perform different tasks. The coprocessor preferably hardware accelerates the basket calculations using reconfigurable logic, such as Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs). In doing so, a preferred embodiment preferably harnesses the underlying hardware-accelerated technology disclosed in the following patents and patent applications: U.S. Pat. No. 6,711,558 entitled “Associated Database Scanning and Information Retrieval”, U.S. Pat. No. 7,139,743 entitled “Associative Database Scanning and Information Retrieval using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0294059 entitled “Intelligent Data Storage and Processing Using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0067108 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Performing Biosequence Similarity Searching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0086274 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Protein Sequence Alignment Using FPGA Devices”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0130140 entitled “Method and Device for High Performance Regular Expression Pattern Matching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0260602 entitled “Method and Apparatus for Approximate Pattern Matching”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0174841 entitled “Firmware Socket Module for FPGA-Based Pipeline Processing”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0237327 entitled “Method and System for High Throughput Blockwise Independent Encryption/Decryption”, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0294157 entitled “Method and System for High Speed Options Pricing”, and U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0243675entitled “High Speed Processing of Financial Information Using FPGA Devices”, the entire disclosures of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
According to another aspect of a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the inventors disclose that the different tasks involved in such basket calculations can be relegated to different modules within a pipeline. For example, one pipeline module can be configured to determine which baskets are impacted by a current data event within the stream. Another pipeline module can be configured to receive information about the impacted baskets and compute data indicative of a new basket value for each of those impacted baskets. By pipelining these modules together, the two modules can work on different messages and/or baskets at the same time in parallel with each other.
In a preferred embodiment, this pipeline comprises a basket association lookup module in communication with a basket value updating module. The basket association lookup module is configured to determine which baskets are impacted by each data message, while the basket value updating module is configured to compute at least one new value for each impacted basket based on the information within the data messages (for example, in an embodiment operating on financial market data, this information can be the financial instrument price information within the financial market data messages).
The basket value updating module preferably employs a delta calculation approach to the computation of the updated basket values, as explained in greater detail below. With such an approach, the number of arithmetic operations needed to compute each basket value will remain the same regardless of how many elements such as financial instruments are members of a given basket. Furthermore, the basket value updating module may optionally be configured to compute a plurality of different types of basket values for the same basket simultaneously using parallel computation logic.
The basket association lookup module preferably accesses a basket set table which stores at least a portion of the data needed by the basket value updating module for the basket value calculations. In a preferred embodiment pertaining to financial information, this data can be indirectly indexed in the table by financial instrument such that, as a new message pertaining to a financial instrument is received, the appropriate data needed for the basket calculations can be retrieved. To provide the indirection, a second table is employed which indexes pointers into the basket set table by financial instrument.
Furthermore, in an embodiment wherein the pipeline comprises a firmware pipeline deployed on a coprocessor such as a reconfigurable logic device, the design of these modules can be tailored to the hardware capabilities of the coprocessor, thereby providing a level of synergy that streamlines the basket calculations so that the data streams can be processed at line speeds while a main processor is still free to perform other tasks.
The inventors also note that the pipeline can employ a price event trigger module downstream from the basket value updating module. The price event trigger module can be configured to determine whether any of the updated basket values meet a client-specified trigger condition. Any updated basket values which meet the client-specified trigger condition can then be forwarded to the attention of the pertinent client (e.g., a particular trader, a particular application, etc.). By doing so, clients can take advantage of the low latency nature of the basket calculation pipeline to learn of trading opportunities which may be available.
Furthermore, the pipeline can employ an event generator module downstream from the price event trigger module, wherein the role of the event generator module is to generate a message event for delivery to the client in response to a trigger being set off by the price event trigger module. This message event preferably contains the updated basket value.
Further still, to limit the volume of financial market data messages processed by the basket association lookup module (and its downstream modules in the pipeline), the pipeline can employ a message qualifier filter module upstream from the basket association lookup module. Preferably, the message qualifier filter module is configured to drop messages from the financial market data message stream which are not pertinent to the basket calculations.
A pipeline such as the one described herein can be used in an embodiment of the invention to identify arbitrage conditions (such as the ETF arbitrage scenario discussed above) as they may arise in connection with financial instrument baskets and the current state of the markets. By detecting these arbitrage conditions quickly via the low latency basket calculation pipeline, a trader is enabled to make trades on one or more exchanges which take advantage of the detected arbitrage condition.
These and other features and advantages of the present invention will be apparent to those having ordinary skill in the art upon review of the following description and drawings.
The computer system defined by processor 112 and RAM 108 can be any commodity computer system as would be understood by those having ordinary skill in the art. For example, the computer system may be an Intel Xeon system or an AMD Opteron system. Thus, processor 112, which serves as the central or main processor for system 100, preferably comprises a GPP.
In a preferred embodiment, the coprocessor 140 comprises a reconfigurable logic device 102. Preferably, data streams into the reconfigurable logic device 102 by way of system bus 106, although other design architectures are possible (see
The reconfigurable logic device 102 has firmware modules deployed thereon that define its functionality. The firmware socket module 104 handles the data movement requirements (both command data and target data) into and out of the reconfigurable logic device, thereby providing a consistent application interface to the firmware application module (FAM) chain 150 that is also deployed on the reconfigurable logic device. The FAMs 150i of the FAM chain 150 are configured to perform specified data processing operations on any data that streams through the chain 150 from the firmware socket module 404. Preferred examples of FAMs that can be deployed on reconfigurable logic in accordance with a preferred embodiment of the present invention are described below.
The specific data processing operation that is performed by a FAM is controlled/parameterized by the command data that FAM receives from the firmware socket module 104. This command data can be FAM-specific, and upon receipt of the command, the FAM will arrange itself to carry out the data processing operation controlled by the received command. For example, within a FAM that is configured to perform an exact match operation between data and a key, the FAM's exact match operation can be parameterized to define the key(s) that the exact match operation will be run against. In this way, a FAM that is configured to perform an exact match operation can be readily re-arranged to perform a different exact match operation by simply loading new parameters for one or more different keys in that FAM. As another example pertaining to baskets, a command can be issued to the one or more FAMs that make up a basket calculation engine to add/delete one or more financial instruments to/from the basket.
Once a FAM has been arranged to perform the data processing operation specified by a received command, that FAM is ready to carry out its specified data processing operation on the data stream that it receives from the firmware socket module. Thus, a FAM can be arranged through an appropriate command to process a specified stream of data in a specified manner. Once the FAM has completed its data processing operation, another command can be sent to that FAM that will cause the FAM to re-arrange itself to alter the nature of the data processing operation performed thereby. Not only will the FAM operate at hardware speeds (thereby providing a high throughput of data through the FAM), but the FAMs can also be flexibly reprogrammed to change the parameters of their data processing operations.
The FAM chain 150 preferably comprises a plurality of firmware application modules (FAMs) 150a, 150b, . . . that are arranged in a pipelined sequence. However, it should be noted that within the firmware pipeline, one or more parallel paths of FAMs 150i can be employed. For example, the firmware chain may comprise three FAMs arranged in a first pipelined path (e.g., FAMs 150a, 150b, 150c) and four FAMs arranged in a second pipelined path (e.g., FAMs 150d, 150e, 150f, and 150g), wherein the first and second pipelined paths are parallel with each other. Furthermore, the firmware pipeline can have one or more paths branch off from an existing pipeline path. A practitioner of the present invention can design an appropriate arrangement of FAMs for FAM chain 150 based on the processing needs of a given application.
A communication path 130 connects the firmware socket module 104 with the input of the first one of the pipelined FAMs 150a. The input of the first FAM 150a serves as the entry point into the FAM chain 150. A communication path 132 connects the output of the final one of the pipelined FAMs 150m with the firmware socket module 104. The output of the final FAM 150m serves as the exit point from the FAM chain 150. Both communication path 130 and communication path 132 are preferably multi-bit paths.
The nature of the software and hardware/software interfaces used by system 100, particularly in connection with data flow into and out of the firmware socket module are described in greater detail in the above-referenced and incorporated U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0174841.
It is worth noting that in either the configuration of
The basket calculation engine (BCE) 400 preferably derives its computation of NAVnew from formula (1). A direct implementation of formula (1) by BCE 400 would comprise M multiplications, M-1 additions, and 1 division. While a practitioner of the invention may choose to implement such a direct use of formula (1) within BCE 400, a preferred embodiment for BCE 400 reduces the number of arithmetic operations that need to be performed to realize the function of formula (1). Given that the basis upon which the NAV for a basket is to be updated is a new price for one of the basket's underlying financial instruments, it suffices to calculate the contribution to the basket's NAV of the difference between the new financial instrument price and the old financial instrument price. This calculated contribution can then be added to the old NAV value for the basket to find the updated NAV value. This process is referred to herein as a “delta calculation” for the NAV. This basis for this delta calculation approach is shown below, starting with formula (1).
Thus, it can be seen that NAVnew can be computed as the sum of the old NAV price, NAVold, and Δj, wherein Δj represents the delta contribution to the NAV of the new financial instrument price, and wherein Δj is computed as:
Accordingly, it can be seen that the delta calculation approach can reduce the number of computations needed to calculate the new basket value from M multiplications, M-1 additions, and 1 division to only 1 subtraction, 1 multiplication, 1 division, and 1 addition. This reduction can lead to powerful improvements in computational efficiency because a single basket may contain an arbitrary number of financial instruments. It should be noted that, for some baskets, the value of M may be quite large. For example, a basket may be used to compute the Wilshire 5000 stock index, which is an index that includes approximately 6,300 securities. However, the presence of such a large number of securities within the Wilshire 5000 stock index would not add to the computational latency of a BCE 400 which employs the delta calculation approach because the NAV computation for such a basket will be based on formula (2) above.
The basket association lookup (BAL) module 502 is configured to determine, for each incoming message, a set of baskets which include the financial instrument that is the subject of that message. This basket set may comprise a plurality Q of baskets (although it should be noted that only one basket may potentially be present within the basket set). Thus, the volume heavy nature of tracking basket values for each financial market data message can be understood as each message causing a need for at least Q basket value calculations (a 1:Q expansion). In an exemplary embodiment, the maximum value for Q can be 1,024 baskets. However, other values could readily be used.
In operation, the BAL module 502 performs a lookup in the basket set pointer table 604 using the symbol ID and GEID 600 for each message. Based on the symbol ID and GEID 600, a basket set pointer 606 is retrieved from table 604, and the BAL module 502 uses this basket set pointer 606 to perform a lookup in the basket set table 608. The lookup in the basket set table 608 preferably operates to identify the basket set 610 for the financial instrument identified by the symbol ID and identify the stored last/bid/ask prices 612 for that financial instrument. Each basket set comprises identifiers for one or more baskets of which that financial instrument is a member.
A subtractor 616 preferably operates to subtract the retrieved last/bid/ask prices 612 from the new last/bid/ask prices 602 contained in the current message to thereby compute the changes in the last/bid/ask prices 614, as shown in
Also, a given financial instrument may be fungible on multiple financial exchanges. The state of a financial instrument on a given exchange (e.g., the NYSE) is referred to as the regional view for that financial instrument. The aggregate state of that financial instrument across all exchanges is referred to as the composite view for that financial instrument. The composite value for the last price is preferably the most recent sales price for the financial instrument on any exchange. The composite value for the bid price is preferably the best of the bid prices for the financial instrument across all of exchanges on which that financial instrument is traded. The composite view for the ask price is preferably the best of the ask prices for the financial instrument across all of exchanges on which that financial instrument is traded. Thus, the bid price and ask price in the composite view are commonly referred to as the Best Bid and Offer (BBO) prices. Tables 604 and 608 allow for baskets to be defined with regional and/or composite views of financial instruments. For example, basket A may contain the composite view of the 10 technology stocks with the largest market capitalization. Basket B may contain the NYSE regional view of the 10 technology stocks with the largest market capitalization. Basket C may contain the composite view for 10 technology stocks and the NYSE regional view for 10 industrial stocks.
To accommodate such flexible basket definitions, table 604 preferably employs a plurality of GEID fields 706 within each record 700. Each GEID field 706 serves as a further index into table 608 to retrieve the appropriate composite basket association record and/or regional basket association record for the pertinent financial instrument. Thus, BAL module 502 uses the GEID of the current message to identify a matching GEID field 706 in record 700. Field 7060, which corresponds to GEID0, is preferably used to identify any basket association records in table 608 which correspond to the composite view for the financial instrument. The other fields 706 are used to identify any basket association records in table 608 which correspond to the region-specific view for the financial instrument. For example, GEID1 may correspond to the NYSE view for the financial instrument while GEIDm may correspond to the NASDAQ view for the financial instrument. The matching GEID field 706 is then used as an additional index into table 608 to retrieve a set of basket association records for the financial instrument that are applicable to both composite views and regional views of the financial instrument.
Preferably, BAL module 502 will always retrieve the composite GEID0 field applicable to a given financial instrument. Furthermore, for a message with regional price information about a financial instrument, the BAL module 502 also operates to match the GEID field in the message with a GEID field 706 in record 700 for that financial instrument. Thus, the basket set pointer 606 used by the BAL module 502 preferably comprises the header block pointer 704, the composite GEID index 7060, and the regional GEID index 706i for the subject message.
Preferably, each block 800 preferably comprises either composite basket association information or regional basket association information for the subject financial instrument. Also, the blocks 800 are preferably located in memory such that the composite and regional blocks for a given financial instrument are stored in contiguous memory addresses. In this way, the header block pointer 704 can be used to locate the financial instrument's composite block 800, while the GEID index 706 can be used to locate the applicable regional block 800 for the financial instrument by serving as an increment to the address found in the header block pointer 704.
Each basket information field 816 in table 608 preferably comprises a basket identifier and weight pair (Basket ID, Weight). The Basket ID serves to identify a particular basket while the weight serves to identify the weight to be used when computing the delta contribution for subject financial instrument to the identified basket.
Given that a single financial instrument may be present in a number of different baskets, it is possible that the number of (Basket ID, Weight) pairs needed for a given financial instrument will not fit within a single block 800. To accommodate such overflow situations, table 608 also preferably comprises a plurality of extension block records 822. Each extension block record 822 preferably has a fixed size and comprises a bit string corresponding to an extension pointer 818, a bit string corresponding to a count field 820, any one or more (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816 as needed for the financial instrument. If the number of (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816 for the financial instrument are unable to fit within a single extension block 822, then the extension pointer 818 will serve to identify the address of an additional extension block 822 in which the additional (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816 are found. It should thus be noted that a plurality of extension blocks 822 may be needed to encompass all of a financial instrument's relevant (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816. The count field 820 identifies how many (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816 are present within the subject extension block 822.
The count field 806 within a block 800 serves to identify how many (Basket ID, Weight) pairs 816 are present within that block 800.
Fields 810, 812, and 814 contain the most recently stored bid/ask/last prices for the subject financial instrument on the pertinent exchange. As shown by
Thus, using the pointer 704 and GEID index reference 706 retrieved from table 604, the BAL module 502 is configured to access a block 800 in table 608 corresponding to the composite information relevant to the subject message (e.g., the block 800 shown in
In the example of
BAL module 502 is also preferably configured to update the records in table 608 with the new prices 602 in each message. This is shown by arrow 618 in
It should be noted that the array of GEID fields 706 for each record 700 in table 604 may be of fixed size for simplicity. Depending upon how much size a practitioner allocates to the GEID fields 706 in each record 700, it may be the case that a financial instrument trades on a sufficiently large number of exchanges that there are not a sufficient number of fields 706 for storing the financial instrument's relevant GEIDs. Thus, if this situation arises and the GEID 600 of the message does not find a match to any GEID fields 706 in the pertinent record 700 of table 604, then the BAL module 502, to retrieve an appropriate regional block from table 608, preferably indexes to the last header block 800 in the record for that financial instrument and conducts a linear search through the header blocks' GEID fields 802 to find a match to the GEID 600 associated with the message.
It should also be noted that if the GEID 600 is not found in any of the GEID fields 802 for the financial instrument record in table 608, this means that the regional view of that financial instrument corresponding to GEID 600 is not included in any baskets.
It should also be noted that baskets may be dynamically changed throughout the day by adding and/or removing (Basket ID, Weight) pairs from the basket association records in table 608 for financial instruments.
To add a financial instrument to a basket, the system adds the appropriate (Basket ID, Weight) pair to that financial instrument's record in table 608. A control process, preferably performed in software executing on a GPP such as processor 112, preferably maintains a copy of tables 604 and 608 and computes where entries need to be added to the table 608 (and possibly table 604 if the GEID for that financial instrument is not present in the GEID fields 706 of record 700 for that financial instrument) to reflect the addition of the financial instrument to the basket. These determinations can be made using the symbol ID and GEID for the financial instrument to be added. The control process then preferably sends memory write commands to the pipeline for consumption by the BAL module 502 that are effective to write update tables 604 and 608 to reflect the addition of the subject financial instrument to a basket. The control process may also be configured to immediately send a synthetic event to the pipeline for consumption by the BAL module 502 wherein this event contains the current prices for the relevant financial instrument. This action will cause delta updates to the NAV values for the subject basket wherein these delta updates are relative to a zero (so the entirety of the price contribution is determined). However, it should also be noted that the control process may be configured to simply wait for subsequent market events to arrive at the pipeline and allow the delta updates to be applied at that time.
Removing a financial instrument from a basket generally involves removing the (basket ID, weight) pair for the subject basket from the record in table 608 for the subject financial instrument. Furthermore, to appropriately update the NAV values to reflect the deletion of the financial instrument from the basket, the control process preferably generates a synthetic event for delivery to the pipeline wherein the price information for the subject financial instrument is zero. This causes the delta price values 614 for the financial instrument to be the negative value of the price information for that financial instrument stored in table 608, thus removing the entirety of the price contribution for that financial instrument to the subject basket.
To add an entire basket to the system, it follows that the control process can issue appropriate memory write commands to the pipeline that adds (Basket ID, Weight) pairs to table 608 for all of the new basket's constituent financial instruments. The control process can also generate synthetic events for delivery to the pipeline which reflects the current price information for these constituent financial instruments, as explained above. Moreover, as can be understood in connection with
To delete an entire basket from the system, it also follows that the control process can be configured to initiate a removal of the (Basket ID, Weight) pairs from table 608 for all of the subject basket's constituent financial instruments. Similarly, the records in the tables shown in
The output from the BAL module 502 will be a stream of delta events. Each delta event preferably comprises a retrieved (Basket ID, Weight) pair 610 and at least one computed price change 614 for a financial instrument corresponding to that retrieved (Basket ID, Weight) pair 610. In an embodiment of the invention, each delta event includes all of the price deltas, even if one or more of the price deltas (e.g., the ΔBid price) is zero. However, this need not be the case, as noted below.
It should also be understood that, for each message event that is received at the input to the BAL module 502, a plurality of delta events may be produced at the output of the BAL module 502 due to the fact that the financial instrument which is the subject of the received message may be a member of a plurality of baskets. Partly because of this expansion, the low latency nature of pipeline 500 is particularly advantageous in allowing the task of updating basket values to keep up with the inflow of events from the different exchanges.
Returning to
A delta event buffer 900 buffers the delta events produced by the BAL module 502. For each delta event read out of buffer 900, the BVU module 504 performs a lookup in a divisor table 902 to determine the appropriate value for the divisor d from formula (3) for the basket corresponding to the Basket ID within the current delta event. Thus, it can be seen that table 902 preferably indexes each divisor value by the Basket ID for the divisor's corresponding basket. The delta event buffer 900 and the divisor table 902 are preferably located within available on-chip memory for the reconfigurable logic device 102. However, it should be noted that buffer 900 and table 902 could alternatively be stored on any memory resource within or accessible to coprocessor 140.
A NAV update engine 950 then receives as an input the delta event information (the (Basket ID, Weight) pair 610 and the delta bid/ask/last prices 614) plus the divisor value d for that delta event to compute at least one updated basket value NAVnew. Preferably, the NAV update engine 950 is configured to compute a plurality of different types of basket NAV's for each basket. For example, the NAV update engine 950 can be configured to compute, in parallel, new NAVs based on bid prices, ask prices, last prices, bid-tick prices, and ask+tick prices (Bid NAVnew, Ask NAVnew, Last NAVnew, Bid-Tick NAVnew, and Ask+Tick NAVnew respectively), as shown in
A demultipexer 904 operates to route portions of the delta event information and the divisor value to the appropriate NAV compute logic 916. The NAV update engine preferably employs a plurality of parallel computing paths to compute each type of basket NAV.
The computing path for computing Bid NAVnew preferably operates on the Basket ID, Weight, Divisor, and ΔBid price. The BVU module 504 performs a lookup in a Bid NAV table 906 based on the Basket ID to retrieve a stored Bid NAV value (Bid NAVold) for the subject basket. This Bid NAVold value serves as the NAVold value in formula (2) during computation of Bid NAVnew. NAV compute logic 916 then (i) computes the delta contribution Δj for the financial instrument according to formula (3) using the divisor value as the d term in formula (3), the Weight value as the wj term in formula (3), and the ΔBid value as the (Tjnew−Tjold) term in formula (3), and (ii) thereafter computes Bid NAVnew according to formula (2) based on the computed Δj value and the Bid NAVold value.
The computing path for computing Ask NAVnew preferably operates in the same manner as the computing path for Bid NAVnew albeit performing a lookup in an Ask NAV table 908 based on the Basket ID and using the ΔAsk price rather than the ΔBid price.
The computing path for computing Last NAVnew also preferably operates in the same manner as the computing path for Bid NAVnew albeit performing a lookup in an Last NAV table 910 based on the Basket ID and using the ΔLast price rather than the ΔBid price.
Likewise, the computing paths for computing the Bid-Tick NAVnew and Ask+Tick NAVnew value preferably operate in the same manner as the computing path for Bid NAVnew albeit performing lookups in, respectively, a Bid-Tick NAV table 912 and an Ask+Tick NAV table 914 based on the Basket ID and using, respectively, the ΔBid price and the ΔAsk price.
Table 912 can store previously computed NAVs for each basket that are based on a price for the financial instrument that is the previous bid price for the financial instrument minus a tick value. Table 914 can store previously computed NAVs for each basket that are based on a price for the financial instrument that is the previous ask price for the financial instrument plus a tick value.
Preferably, tables 906, 908, 910, 912, and 914 are stored in available on-chip memory for the reconfigurable logic device 102. However, it should be noted that these tables could alternatively be stored on any memory resource within or accessible to coprocessor 140.
Thus, it can be seen that the NAV update engine 950 is preferably configured to output, each clock cycle, an updated basket event, wherein each updated basket event comprises a plurality of different updated NAVs for a particular basket together with a Basket ID for that basket.
The BVU module is also preferably configured to update tables 906, 908, 910, 912, and 914 with the newly computed NAV values. Thus, the newly computed Bid NAVnew for a given Basket ID can be fed back into an entry for that Basket ID in table 906 so that the next delta event pertaining to the same Basket ID will retrieve the most current NAVold value. The memory for tables 906, 908, 910, 912, and 914 is preferably dual-ported, thus allowing for two read/write operations to occur on each clock cycle. If updating logic for the BVU module is pipelined, it can be expected that contention for the same Basket ID entry in a given table during a read and write operation on the same clock cycle will be rare and can be identified and avoided using techniques known in the art.
Also, a control process can issue a memory write command to the pipeline for consumption by the BVU module to update an entry in the divisor table 902 in the event of a change in value for a basket's divisor. Such a control process is preferably performed in software executing on a GPP such as processor 112.
It should be noted that the BVU module 504 can employ a plurality of NAV update engines 950 in parallel to thereby simultaneously compute a plurality of basket NAV types for a plurality of baskets. An example of this is shown in
If desired, it should be noted that a single set of NAV tables 906, 908, 910, 912, and 914 can be shared by a plurality of NAV update engines 950. If the number of NAV update engines exceeds the number of available ports for reading from the NAV tables, then the BVU module 504 can be configured to interleave the accesses to these tables from the different NAV update engines. These tables could also be replicated if desired to avoid such interleaving. The same can be said with respect to divisor table 902 (while
PET module 1200 preferably accesses a plurality of tables corresponding to different NAV types, wherein these tables store client reference values for each basket. These reference values are used by the PET module 1200 to judge whether new basket values should be reported to interested clients. In an exemplary embodiment, the reference values are NAV values for the subject baskets which were previously reported to the client. Thus, a client NAV table preferably exists for each basket value type generated by the BVU module 504. Thus, reference value table 1302 stores a plurality of client Bid NAVs for the different baskets, wherein each client Bid NAV is indexed by a basket identifier. Reference value table 1304 stores a plurality of client Ask NAVs for the different baskets (each client Ask NAV being indexed by a basket identifier). Reference value table 1306 stores a plurality of client Last NAVs for the different baskets (each client Last NAV being indexed by a basket identifier). Reference value table 1308 stores a plurality of client Bid-Tick NAVs for the different baskets (each client Bid-Tick NAV being indexed by a basket identifier). Reference value table 1310 stores a plurality of client Ask+Tick NAVs for the different baskets (each client Ask+Tick NAV being indexed by a basket identifier). Each of these tables preferably stores the most recent of their respective NAV types to be reported to the client. Thus, in the event of one of the triggers being set off by a new basket value, the PET module is preferably configured to update the NAV values in the client tables with the new basket values. Such updating logic can be configured to update the tables only for those NAV values which set off the trigger or can be configured to update all of the tables when any NAV value sets off a trigger.
Also, a client NAV trigger threshold table preferably exists for each basket value type generated by the BVU module 504. Thus, table 1314 stores a plurality of client Bid NAV trigger threshold values for the different baskets, wherein each client Bid NAV trigger threshold value is indexed by a basket identifier. Table 1316 stores a plurality of client Ask NAV trigger threshold values for the different baskets (each client Ask NAV trigger threshold value being indexed by a basket identifier). Table 1318 stores a plurality of client Last NAV trigger threshold values for the different baskets (each client Last NAV trigger threshold value being indexed by a basket identifier). Table 1320 stores a plurality of client Bid-Tick NAV trigger threshold values for the different baskets (each client Bid-Tick NAV trigger threshold value being indexed by a basket identifier). Table 1322 stores a plurality of client Ask+Tick NAV trigger threshold values for the different baskets (each client Ask+Tick NAV trigger threshold value being indexed by a basket identifier).
Preferably, tables 1302, 1304, 1306, 1308, 1310, 1314, 1316, 1318, 1320, and 1322 are stored in available on-chip memory for the reconfigurable logic device 102. However, it should be noted that these tables could alternatively be stored on any memory resource within or accessible to coprocessor 140.
Also, it should be noted that the client NAV tables and the client NAV trigger threshold tables can be optionally consolidated if desired by a practitioner of this embodiment of the invention. In doing so, the records in the client Bid NAV table 1302 would be merged with the records in the client Bid NAV trigger threshold table 1314 such that each record comprises the client Bid NAV and the client Bid NAV trigger threshold value. Similarly, table 1304 could be merged with table 1316, table 1306 with table 1318, table 1308 with table 1320, and table 1310 with table 1322.
PET module 1200 preferably employs a plurality of parallel computing paths to determine whether any of the NAV types within each basket event set off a client trigger.
A first computing path is configured to perform a lookup in the client Bid NAV table 1302 and a lookup in the client Bid NAV trigger threshold table 1314 based on the current updated basket event's Basket ID to thereby retrieve a client Bid NAV and a client Bid NAV trigger threshold value. The client Bid NAV serves as a trigger against which the Bid NAV within the updated basket event is compared. The client Bid NAV trigger threshold value is then used as the criteria to judge whether the trigger has been set off. NAV-to-trigger comparison logic 1312 then operates perform this comparison and determine whether the trigger has been set off, wherein a Bid NAV trigger flag indicates the result of this determination.
Additional computing paths perform these operations for the updated basket event's Ask NAV, Last NAV, Bid-Tick NAV, and Ask+Tick NAV to produce Ask NAV, Last NAV, Bid-Tick NAV, and Ask+Tick NAV trigger flags, respectively, as shown in
Trigger detection logic 1324 receives the different NAV trigger flags produced by the computing paths. This logic 1324 is configured to determine whether any of the trigger flags for a given updated basket event are high. Preferably, the trigger detection logic 1324 is configured pass an updated basket event as an output if any of the flags for that updated basket event are high. As such, it can be seen that the PET module 1200 serves as a filter which passes updated basket events that are deemed noteworthy according to client-defined criteria.
Thus, a client may want to be notified whenever the Bid NAV of Basket 145 changes by $0.05, whenever the Ask NAV for Basket 145 changes by $0.03, or whenever the Last NAV for Basket 145 changes by $0.02. In such an instance, the client Bid NAV trigger threshold value in table 1314 for Basket 145 can be set equal to $0.05, the client Ask NAV trigger threshold value in table 1316 for Basket 145 can be set equal to $0.03, and the client Last NAV trigger threshold value in table 1318 for Basket 145 can be set equal to $0.02. If the new bid NAV, Ask NAV, and Last NAV values within the updated basket event for Basket 145 are $20.50, $20.40, and $20.20 respectively, while the stored values for the client NAVs of Basket 145 are $20, $20.42, and $20.19 respectively, then the comparison logic will operate to set the Bid NAV trigger flag high, the Ask NAV trigger flag low, and the Last NAV trigger flag high.
However, it should be noted that the comparison logic 1312 could be configured to determine whether a client trigger has been set off in any of a number of ways. For example, the client threshold values can be expressed in terms of percentages if desired (with corresponding adjustments in the comparison logic to compute the percentage difference between the new NAV and the client NAV). Also, the trigger condition could be based on a tracking instrument that is different than the subject NAV. For example, the trigger condition for a given basket can be defined in relation to a stored price for the DJIA. The client NAV tables would then store a DJIA price for that basket, and that basket's NAV prices would be compared against the retrieved DJIA price to determine whether the trigger threshold has been reached.
It should be noted that the PET module 1200 can be configured to detect arbitrage conditions by appropriately populating the client NAV tables and the client trigger threshold tables. For example, with ETFs, a client NAV table can be populated with the current share price of the ETF itself (TETF). Thus, the client bid NAV table could be populated with the current bid price for a share of the ETF, the client ask NAV table could be populated with the current ask price for a share of the ETF, the client last NAV table could be populated with the current last price for a share of the ETF, etc. By populating the client NAV tables in this manner, the PET module can detect when there is a discrepancy between the share price of the ETF and the net asset value of the ETF's constituent financial instruments. Such a discrepancy can be taken advantage of by a trader, as explained above.
Thus, a client application that is informed by the pipeline of a discrepancy between TETF and the ETF's NAV can place one or more trades on one or more financial markets to realize a profit from the detected arbitrage condition. For example, if the ETF's NAV is less than the ETF's share price, a client application can execute the following steps:
It should also be noted that the trigger thresholds in the client trigger threshold tables can be populated with values that take into account any expected transactional costs involved in the process of making such trades to take advantage of the price discrepancy, as explained below. Thus, if the sales price for the assembled ETF exceeds the aggregate prices of the financial instrument shares purchased to assemble the basket and the related transactional costs in doing so (or the sales prices for the constituent financial instruments exceeds the purchase price of the ETF and the related transactional costs), a trader who uses the client application can yield a profit by way of arbitrage. For such actions to work, the inventors note that time is of the essence, and it is believed that the low latency nature of the disclosed pipeline greatly increases a trader's ability to recognize and profit from such arbitrage conditions as they arise in a constantly fluctuating market.
Moreover, it should be noted that the PET module 1200 can filter updated basket events for a plurality of different clients. In this manner, each subscribing client can define its own set of reference values and trigger thresholds. To accomplish such a feature, each updated basket event can be compared in parallel with a plurality of criteria for different clients via a plurality of client-specific PET modules 1500, as shown in
An interest list table 1700 preferably stores such a bit vector for each basket. As the event generator module 1600 receives a triggered basket event from the PET module 1200, the event generator module 1600 performs a lookup in the interest list table 1700 based on the Basket ID within the triggered basket event. As a result of this lookup, the interest list vector for that Basket ID is retrieved. A formatter 1702 thereafter builds an output message event 1704 from the retrieved interest list vector 1706 and the information within the received triggered basket event, as shown in
The interest list table 1700 is preferably located within available on-chip memory for the reconfigurable logic device 102. However, it should be noted that table 1700 could alternatively be stored on any memory resource within or accessible to coprocessor 140. Also, it should be noted that formatter 1702 may optionally be configured to access one or more data tables (not shown; either on-chip or off-chip) to define the appropriate fields for the output event 1704.
It should also be noted that the event generator module 1600 may be configured to store statistics such as the number of triggered basket events it receives, the number of output events it produces, and the average inter-event time for each triggered basket event.
If any of the inputs to AND logic 1904 are high, then this will cause the pass/drop signal 1906 to follow as high. Logic 1908 is configured to be controlled by signal 1906 when deciding whether to pass incoming messages to the output. Thus, if any of the matching qualifiers from table 1900 maps to a high bit in table 1902, this will result in the subject message being passed on to the output of the message qualifier filter module 1800.
In this manner, each qualifier in the qualifier table may define a message criteria which, if found in an incoming message, will result in that incoming message being passed along or blocked from propagating downstream in pipeline 500. Examples of message qualifiers which can be stored by table 1900 to indicate that a message should be blocked would be indicators in messages that identify the message as any of a non-firm quote, penalty bid, withdrawn quote, held trade, and out of sequence trade.
Tables 1900 and 1902 are preferably located within available on-chip memory for the reconfigurable logic device 102. However, it should be noted that these tables could alternatively be stored on any memory resource within or accessible to coprocessor 140.
It should also be noted that the incoming messages to pipeline 500 are preferably normalized messages in that the message fields are formatted in a manner expected by the pipeline 500. Such normalization may optionally have been already been performed prior to the time that the messages reach pipeline 500. However, optionally, pipeline 500 may include a message normalization module 2000 as shown in
With respect to administering the BCE 400, it should be noted that baskets and trigger conditions can be created, modified, and/or deleted in any of a number of ways. For example, a system administrator and/or client application can be given the ability to define baskets and/or trigger conditions
To create and/or modify a basket, appropriate entries and allocations will be needed for the new/modified basket in the various tables described herein in connection with pipeline 500. A system administrator may use a control interface to add/modify basket configurations. Client applications may submit basket definitions via an application programming interface (API) that runs on their local machine(s).
The BCE pipeline may be deployed on coprocessor 140 of a ticker plant platform 2100 as shown in
Instructions from client applications may also be communicated to the hardware interface driver 2106 for ultimate delivery to coprocessor 140 to appropriately configure a BCE pipeline that is instantiated on coprocessor 140. Such instructions arrive at an O/S supplied protocol stack 2110 from which they are delivered to a request processing software module 2116. A background and maintenance processing software module 2114 thereafter determines whether the client application has the appropriate entitlement to add/change/modify a basket. If so entitled, the background and maintenance processing block 2114 communicates a command instruction to the hardware interface driver 2106 for delivery to the coprocessor to appropriately update the table entries in the BCE pipeline to reflect the added/changed/modified basket, as previously explained above. Deletions of baskets as well as additions/modifications/deletions of trigger conditions from the BCE pipeline can be performed via a like process, as indicated above.
The hardware interface driver 2106 then can deliver an interleaved stream of financial market data and commands to the coprocessor 140 for consumption thereby. Outgoing data from the coprocessor 140 returns to the hardware interface driver 2106, from which it can be supplied to MDC driver 2108 for delivery to the client connections (via protocol stack 2110) and/or delivery to the background and maintenance processing block 2114.
As discussed above, some financial instrument baskets such as ETFs may have some form of cash component to them. These cash components can be taken into account by the system in any of a number of ways.
For example, to insert a cash component into a basket's NAV, a control process can be configured to generate a synthetic event for delivery to the pipeline. A symbol ID would be assigned to a given cash account, and the price for that synthetic symbol ID would be $1 and the weight value w for that cash account would be set equal to the cash value of the cash account. The tables used by the BAL module would be updated to reflect this synthetic symbol ID and cause the cash account to impact the NAV for the basket. In a more complex scenario, events could be delivered to the pipeline so that the value of the cash account can fluctuate with the value of the pertinent currency on the foreign exchange market.
Another way of injecting a cash component of a basket into the system is to define the trigger threshold values in tables 1314, 1316, 1318, 1320, and 1322 such that the cash component amounts are built into those trigger threshold values.
Also, it should be noted that the BAL module (or the BVU module) can be configured to drop events where all of the delta prices for that event are zero.
Similarly, it should be noted that in the embodiment of
It should also be noted that logic could be added to the BVU modules such that the NAV computations are also based on derived statistics such as the Volume Weighted Average Price (VWAP) and use other fields which may be available in a message, such as the difference in traded volume.
It should also be noted that the coprocessor 140 can be configured to perform computations in addition to those of the BCE if desired by a practitioner of an embodiment of the invention. For example, the coprocessor 140 can also employ a last value caching (LVC) module, as described in the above-referenced and incorporated U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0243675.
It should be noted that a practitioner of an embodiment of the invention may choose to compute the value for Δj but not the value for NAVnew, in which case the BVU module need not produce any NAVnew values. In such instances, the trigger conditions used by the PET module 1200 can be built around variation in Δj rather than NAVnew. In such a situation, the client could optionally determine the NAV values itself from the Δj value, although a practitioner may find value in the Δj values themselves apart from their actual combination with an old NAV value to find a new NAV value.
Also, while the preferred embodiment for the BAL module 502 is configured to compute the delta values for the last/bid/ask prices in the incoming messages, it should be noted that the computation of such delta values can optionally be performed by one or more modules upstream from the BAL module 502 or the BCE pipeline 500 altogether. As such, the input messages to the BCE pipeline 500 may already contain the ΔBid, ΔAsk, and/or ΔLast prices for the subject financial instruments. In such instances, table 608 would not need to store the previous bid/ask/last prices for each financial instrument, and BAL module 502 need not employ the logic necessary to compute those delta prices.
Furthermore, while in the preferred embodiment disclosed herein the coprocessor 140 comprises a reconfigurable logic device 102 such as an FPGA, it should be noted that the coprocessor 140 can be realized using other processing devices. For example, the coprocessor 140 may comprise graphics processor units (GPUs), general purpose graphics processors, chip multi-processors (CMPs), dedicated memory devices, complex programmable logic devices, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and other I/O processing components. Moreover, it should be noted that system 100 may employ a plurality of coprocessors 140 in either or both of a sequential and a parallel multi-coprocessor architecture.
Further still, while the inventors believe that special advantages exist in connection with using the pipeline disclosed herein to process financial information and compute updated values for financial instrument baskets, the inventors further note that the disclosed pipeline also provides latency advantages when processing non-financial data which pertains to baskets. For example, the basket calculation engine may be configured to compute the net asset value of the inventory held by a multi-national retail organization. Incoming events to the pipeline that correspond to product sales and/or product deliveries could thus be used to update stored values for each product, wherein these stored values correspond to inventory count values. A weight assigned to each product would correspond to a price value assigned to the product. Thus, a pipeline such as the one disclosed herein could be used to closely track the net inventory values of the organization's products. Triggers may then be used to notify management when inventory values swell or shrink by a given threshold.
Another example would be for a basket which is a collection of data points from some type of scientific experiment. Each data point may have associated values such as size, mass, etc., and these data points may arrive over time as streaming data from one or more monitoring stations. The pipeline can readily be configured to derive a size NV by computing a weighted sum of the sizes from the incoming data stream and/or a mass NV by computing a weighted sum of the masses from the incoming data stream.
While the present invention has been described above in relation to its preferred embodiments, various modifications may be made thereto that still fall within the invention's scope. Such modifications to the invention will be recognizable upon review of the teachings herein. Accordingly, the full scope of the present invention is to be defined solely by the appended claims and their legal equivalents.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2046381 | Hicks et al. | Jul 1936 | A |
3082402 | Scantlin | Mar 1963 | A |
3296597 | Scantlin et al. | Jan 1967 | A |
3573747 | Adams et al. | Apr 1971 | A |
3581072 | Nymeyer | May 1971 | A |
4044334 | Bachman et al. | Aug 1977 | A |
4300193 | Bradley et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4412287 | Braddock, III | Oct 1983 | A |
4674044 | Kalmus et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4903201 | Wagner | Feb 1990 | A |
5023910 | Thomson | Jun 1991 | A |
5038284 | Kramer | Aug 1991 | A |
5050075 | Herman et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5077665 | Silverman et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5101353 | Lupien et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5126936 | Champion et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5161103 | Kosaka et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5243655 | Wang | Sep 1993 | A |
5249292 | Chiappa | Sep 1993 | A |
5258908 | Hartheimer et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5267148 | Kosaka et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5270922 | Higgins | Dec 1993 | A |
5297032 | Trojan et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5313560 | Maruoka et al. | May 1994 | A |
5315634 | Tanaka et al. | May 1994 | A |
5319776 | Hile et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5371794 | Diffie et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5375055 | Togher et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5404488 | Kerrigan et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5418951 | Damashek | May 1995 | A |
5421028 | Swanson | May 1995 | A |
5461712 | Chelstowski et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5481735 | Mortensen et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5497317 | Hawkins et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5497488 | Akizawa et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5500793 | Deming, Jr. et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5651125 | Witt et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5684980 | Casselman | Nov 1997 | A |
5701464 | Aucsmith | Dec 1997 | A |
5781921 | Nichols | Jul 1998 | A |
5802290 | Casselman | Sep 1998 | A |
5805832 | Brown et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809483 | Broka et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5813000 | Furlani | Sep 1998 | A |
5826075 | Bealkowski et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5845266 | Lupien et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5857176 | Ginsberg | Jan 1999 | A |
5864738 | Kessler et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5870730 | Furuya et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5873071 | Ferstenberg et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5884286 | Daughtery, III | Mar 1999 | A |
5905974 | Fraser et al. | May 1999 | A |
5913211 | Nitta | Jun 1999 | A |
5950196 | Pyreddy et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5963923 | Garber | Oct 1999 | A |
5978801 | Yuasa | Nov 1999 | A |
5987432 | Zusman et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991881 | Conklin et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995963 | Nanba et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6016483 | Rickard et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023755 | Casselman | Feb 2000 | A |
6023760 | Karttunen | Feb 2000 | A |
6028939 | Yin | Feb 2000 | A |
6044407 | Jones et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6061662 | Makivic | May 2000 | A |
6067569 | Khaki et al. | May 2000 | A |
6073160 | Grantham et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6105067 | Batra | Aug 2000 | A |
6134551 | Aucsmith | Oct 2000 | A |
6138176 | McDonald et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
RE36946 | Diffie et al. | Nov 2000 | E |
6147890 | Kawana et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6147976 | Shand et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6169969 | Cohen | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173270 | Cristofich et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6173276 | Kant et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175874 | Imai et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6178494 | Casselman | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6195024 | Fallon | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6226676 | Crump et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236980 | Reese | May 2001 | B1 |
6243753 | Machin et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6263321 | Daughtery, III | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272616 | Fernando et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278982 | Korhammer et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6279113 | Vaidya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6289440 | Casselman | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6295530 | Ritchie et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6304858 | Mosler et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6309424 | Fallon | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6317728 | Kane | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6317795 | Malkin et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6336150 | Ellis et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6339819 | Huppenthal et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6370645 | Lee et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377942 | Hinsley et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381242 | Maher, III et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6397259 | Lincke et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397335 | Franczek et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6412000 | Riddle et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415269 | Dinwoodie | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418419 | Nieboer et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6430272 | Maruyama et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6456982 | Pilipovic | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463474 | Fuh et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484209 | Momirov | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6499107 | Gleichauf et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6546375 | Pang et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6578147 | Shanklin et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6581098 | Kumpf | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6594643 | Freeny, Jr. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6597812 | Fallon et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6601104 | Fallon | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6604158 | Fallon | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6624761 | Fallon | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6625150 | Yu | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6691301 | Bowen | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6704816 | Burke | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6710702 | Averbuch et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711558 | Indeck et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6765918 | Dixon et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6766304 | Kemp, II et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6772132 | Kemp, II et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6772136 | Kant et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6772345 | Shetty | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778968 | Gulati | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785677 | Fritchman | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6804667 | Martin | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807156 | Veres et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6839686 | Galant | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6850906 | Chadha et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6886103 | Brustoloni et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6901461 | Bennett | May 2005 | B2 |
6931408 | Adams et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6931545 | Ta et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6944168 | Paatela et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6978223 | Milliken | Dec 2005 | B2 |
6981054 | Krishna | Dec 2005 | B1 |
7003488 | Dunne et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7019674 | Cadambi et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7024384 | Daughtery, III | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7058735 | Spencer | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7065475 | Brundobler | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7089206 | Martin | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7093023 | Lockwood et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7099838 | Gastineau et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7103569 | Groveman et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7124106 | Stallaert et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7127424 | Kemp, II et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7130913 | Fallon | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7139743 | Indeck et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7149715 | Browne et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7161506 | Fallon | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7167980 | Chiu | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7177833 | Marynowski et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7181437 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7181608 | Fallon et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7212998 | Muller et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7222114 | Chan et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7224185 | Campbell et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7228289 | Brumfield et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7249118 | Sandler et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7251629 | Marynowski et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7277887 | Burrows et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7305383 | Kubesh et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7321937 | Fallon | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7356498 | Kaminsky et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7363277 | Dutta et al. | Apr 2008 | B1 |
7378992 | Fallon | May 2008 | B2 |
7386046 | Fallon et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7406444 | Eng et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7417568 | Fallon et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7454418 | Wang | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7461064 | Fontoura et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7539845 | Wentzlaff et al. | May 2009 | B1 |
7558753 | Neubert et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7565525 | Vorbach et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7603303 | Kraus et al. | Oct 2009 | B1 |
7636703 | Taylor | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7660761 | Zhou et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7660793 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7668849 | Narancic et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7714747 | Fallon | May 2010 | B2 |
7761459 | Zhang et al. | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7788293 | Pasztor et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7840482 | Singla et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7856545 | Casselman | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7856546 | Casselman et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7908213 | Monroe et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7908259 | Branscome et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7917299 | Buhler et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7921046 | Parsons et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7945528 | Cytron et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7949650 | Indeck et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7953743 | Indeck et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7954114 | Chamberlain et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7991667 | Kraus et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8015099 | Reid | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8024253 | Peterify et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8027893 | Burrows et al. | Sep 2011 | B1 |
8032440 | Hait | Oct 2011 | B1 |
8046283 | Burns et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8069102 | Indeck et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8073763 | Merrin et al. | Dec 2011 | B1 |
8095508 | Chamberlain et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8131697 | Indeck et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8140416 | Borkovec et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8156101 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8374986 | Indeck et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8407122 | Parsons et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8458081 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8478680 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8515682 | Buhler et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8549024 | Indeck et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8595104 | Parsons et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8600856 | Parsons et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8620881 | Chamberlain et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8626624 | Parsons et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8655764 | Parsons et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8660925 | Borkovec et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8751452 | Chamberlain et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762249 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8768805 | Taylor et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8768888 | Chamberlain et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9020928 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9047243 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
20010003193 | Woodring et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010013048 | Imbert de Tremiolles et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010042040 | Keith | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010047473 | Fallon | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010052038 | Fallon et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20010056547 | Dixon | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020010825 | Wilson | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020019812 | Board et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020023010 | Rittmaster et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020038276 | Buhannic et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020049841 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020069375 | Bowen | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020072893 | Wilson | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020080871 | Fallon et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020082967 | Kaminsky et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091826 | Comeau et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020100029 | Bowen | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020101425 | Hamid | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020105911 | Pruthi et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020129140 | Peled et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020138376 | Hinkle | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143521 | Call | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147670 | Lange | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020156998 | Casselman | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020162025 | Sutton et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020166063 | Lachman et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020180742 | Hamid | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020199173 | Bowen | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030009411 | Ram et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009693 | Brock et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014662 | Gupta et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018630 | Indeck et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023653 | Dunlop et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023876 | Bardsley et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030028408 | RuDusky | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030028690 | Appleby-Alis et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030028864 | Bowen | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033234 | RuDusky | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033240 | Balson et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033450 | Appleby-Alis | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033514 | Appleby-Allis et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033588 | Alexander | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030033594 | Bowen | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030035547 | Newton | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037037 | Adams et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030037321 | Bowen | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030041129 | Applcby-Allis | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030043805 | Graham et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030046668 | Bowen | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030051043 | Wyschogrod et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055658 | RuDusky | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055769 | Rudusky | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055770 | RuDusky | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055771 | RuDusky | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030055777 | Ginsberg | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061409 | RuDusky | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030065607 | Satchwell | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030065943 | Geis et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030074177 | Bowen | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030074582 | Patel et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030078865 | Lee | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030079060 | Dunlop | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030093343 | Huttenlocher et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030093347 | Gray | May 2003 | A1 |
20030105620 | Bowen | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030105721 | Ginter et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030110229 | Kulig et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030117971 | Aubury | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120460 | Aubury | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030121010 | Aubury | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030126065 | Eng et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030140337 | Aubury | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030154368 | Stevens et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030177253 | Schuehler et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030184593 | Dunlop | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030187662 | Wilson | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030191876 | Fallon | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208430 | Gershon | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030221013 | Lockwood et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030233302 | Weber et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040000928 | Cheng et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015502 | Alexander et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040015633 | Smith | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040028047 | Hou et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040034587 | Amberson et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040049596 | Schuehler et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040059666 | Waelbroeck et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040062245 | Sharp et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040100977 | Suzuki et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040170070 | Rapp et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040177340 | Hsu et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040186804 | Chakraborty et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040186814 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040196905 | Yamane et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040199448 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040199452 | Johnston et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205149 | Dillon et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050005145 | Teixeira | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050027634 | Gershon | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050080649 | Alvarez et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050086520 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050091142 | Renton et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050097027 | Kavanaugh | May 2005 | A1 |
20050131790 | Benzschawel et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050187844 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187845 | Eklund et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187846 | Subbu et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187847 | Bonissone et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187848 | Bonissone et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187849 | Bollapragada et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050195832 | Dharmapurikar et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050197938 | Davie et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050197939 | Davie et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050197948 | Davie et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050216384 | Partlow et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050228735 | Duquette | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240510 | Schweickert et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050243824 | Abbazia et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050267836 | Crosthwaite et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283423 | Moser et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283743 | Mulholland et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060020536 | Renton et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060026090 | Balabon | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031154 | Noviello et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060031156 | Noviello et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060053295 | Madhusudan et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059064 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059065 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059066 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059067 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059068 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059069 | Glinberg et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060059083 | Friesen et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060143099 | Partlow et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060215691 | Kobayashi et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060259407 | Rosenthal et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060259417 | Manjnowski et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060282281 | Egetoft | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060282369 | White | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060294059 | Chamberlain et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070025351 | Cohen | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070061231 | Kim-E | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070061241 | Jovanovic et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067108 | Buhler et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070067481 | Sharma et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070078837 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094199 | Deshpande et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070118453 | Bauerschmidt et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118457 | Peterify et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070118500 | Indeck et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070130140 | Cytron et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156574 | Marynowski et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070174841 | Chamberlain et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070179935 | Lee et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070208657 | Petrino | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070237327 | Taylor et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070260602 | Taylor | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070277036 | Chamberlain et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070294157 | Singla et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070294162 | Borkovec | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080077793 | Tan et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080082502 | Gupta | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080086274 | Chamberlain et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080097893 | Walsky et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080109413 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114724 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114725 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080114760 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080126320 | Indeck et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080133453 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080133519 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080162378 | Levine et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080175239 | Sistanizadeh et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080243675 | Parsons et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080275805 | Hecht | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090076981 | Schonberg | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090259598 | Stevens et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090271330 | Hamati et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090287628 | Indeck et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100005036 | Kraus et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100094858 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106976 | Aciicmez et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100198850 | Cytron et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100287294 | Battyani et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110010287 | Mittal et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110040701 | Singla et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110066832 | Casselman et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110125960 | Casselman | May 2011 | A1 |
20110145130 | Glodjo et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110178911 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178912 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178917 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178918 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178919 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110178957 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110179050 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110184844 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110199243 | Fallon et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110246353 | Kraus et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110295967 | Wang et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120089496 | Taylor et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120089497 | Taylor et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120095893 | Taylor et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120109849 | Chamberlain et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120110316 | Chamberlain et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120116998 | Indeck et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120130922 | Indeck et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120179590 | Borkovec et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120246052 | Taylor et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20130086096 | Indeck et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130151458 | Indeck et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130159449 | Taylor et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130262287 | Parsons et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130290163 | Parsons et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140025656 | Indeck et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140040109 | Parsons et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140067830 | Buhler et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140089163 | Parsons et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140164215 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140180903 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140180904 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140180905 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140181133 | Parsons et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20160070583 | Chamberlain et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0573991 | Dec 1993 | EP |
0851358 | Jul 1998 | EP |
09145544 | Jun 1997 | JP |
09-269901 | Oct 1997 | JP |
11-259559 | Sep 1999 | JP |
11282912 | Oct 1999 | JP |
2000357176 | Dec 2000 | JP |
2001283000 | Oct 2001 | JP |
2002117232 | Apr 2002 | JP |
2002269343 | Sep 2002 | JP |
2002352070 | Dec 2002 | JP |
2003-036360 | Feb 2003 | JP |
2003256660 | Sep 2003 | JP |
2006059203 | Mar 2006 | JP |
2006293852 | Oct 2006 | JP |
199010910 | Sep 1990 | WO |
199409443 | Apr 1994 | WO |
199737735 | Oct 1997 | WO |
2000041136 | Jul 2000 | WO |
2001022425 | Mar 2001 | WO |
0135216 | May 2001 | WO |
2001039577 | Jun 2001 | WO |
200172106 | Oct 2001 | WO |
2001080082 | Oct 2001 | WO |
2001080558 | Oct 2001 | WO |
0190890 | Nov 2001 | WO |
2002061525 | Aug 2002 | WO |
2003100650 | Apr 2003 | WO |
2003036845 | May 2003 | WO |
2003100662 | Dec 2003 | WO |
2004017604 | Feb 2004 | WO |
2005017708 | Feb 2005 | WO |
2005026925 | Mar 2005 | WO |
2005048134 | May 2005 | WO |
2006023948 | Mar 2006 | WO |
2006096324 | Sep 2006 | WO |
2007016078 | Feb 2007 | WO |
2007064685 | Jun 2007 | WO |
2007074903 | Jul 2007 | WO |
2007087507 | Aug 2007 | WO |
2007127336 | Nov 2007 | WO |
2007149378 | Dec 2007 | WO |
2008022036 | Feb 2008 | WO |
2008036197 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008063973 | May 2008 | WO |
2008063974 | May 2008 | WO |
2009140363 | Nov 2009 | WO |
2010077829 | Jul 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/760,211 dated Nov. 2, 2009. |
Amanuma et al., “A FPGA Architecture for High Speed Computation”, Proceedings of 60th Convention Architecture, Software Science, Engineering, Mar. 14, 2000, pp. 1-163-1-164, Information Processing Society, Japan. |
Asami et al., “Improvement of DES Key Search on FPGA-Based Parallel Machine “RASH””, Proceedings of Information Processing Society, Aug. 15, 2000, pp. 50-57, vol. 41, No. SIG5 (HPS1), Japan. |
Braun et al., “Protocol Wrappers for Layered Network Packet Processing in Reconfigurable Hardware”, IEEE Micro, Jan.-Feb. 2002, pp. 66-74. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Design and Implementation of a String Matching System for Network Intrusion Detection using FPGA-based Bloom Filters”, Proc. of 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field Programmable Custom Computing Machines, 2004, pp. 1-10. |
English Translation of Office Action for JP Application 2004-508044 dated Feb. 9, 2010. |
Google Search Results Page For “field programmable gate array financial calculation stock market” over dates of Jan. 1, 1990-May 21, 2002, 1 page. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability (Chapter I) for PCT/US2009/030623 dated Jul. 22, 2010. |
Nwodoh et al., “A Processing System for Real-Time Holographic Video Computation”, Reconfigurable Technology: FPGAs for Computing and Application, Proceedings for the SPIE, Sep. 1999, Boston, pp. 129-140, vol. 3844. |
Office Action for AU Application 2009200148 dated Nov. 9, 2010. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/561,615 dated Jun. 17, 2010. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/765,306 dated Mar. 29, 2010. |
Sachin Tandon, “A Programmable Architecture for Real-Time Derivative Trading”, Master's Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2003, Published in Google on Jan. 1, 2001. |
Seki et al., “High Speed Computation of Shogi With FPGA”, Proceedings of 58th Convention Architecture, Software Science, Engineering, Mar. 9, 1999, pp. 1-133-1-134. |
Summons to Attend Oral Proceedings for EP Application 03729000.4 dated Mar. 17, 2010. |
Written Submissions to EPO for EP Application 03729000.4 dated May 10, 2010. |
Yoshitani et al., “Performance Evaluation of Parallel Volume Rendering Machine Re Volver/C40”, Study Report of Information Processing Society, Mar. 5, 1999, pp. 79-84, vol. 99, No. 21. |
Celko, “Joe Celko's Data & Databases: Concepts in Practice”, 1999, pp. 72-74, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. |
Gokhale et al., “Reconfigurable Computing”, 2005, pp. 3, 7, 11-15 and 92-93, Springer. |
Gokhale et al, “Reconfigurable Computing: Accelerating Computation With Field-Programmable Gate Arrays”, 2005, pp. 12-15, Springer. |
Motwani et al., “Randomized Algorithms”, 1995, pp. 215-216, Cambridge University Press. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/938,732 dated Dec. 9, 2011. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/076,906 dated Mar. 5, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/076,929 dated Mar. 2, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/076,951 dated Feb. 29, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/077,036 dated Mar. 16, 2012. |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 11/765,306, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,921,046, filed Jun. 19, 2007. |
Russ et al, Non-Intrusive Built-In Self-Test for FPGA and MCM Applications, Aug. 8-10, 1995, IEEE, 480-485. |
Shasha et al., “Database Tuning”, 2003, pp. 280-284, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. |
Skiena et al., “Programming Challenges: The Programming Contest Training Manual”, 2003, pp. 30-31, Springer. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,340, filed Nov. 21, 2011 (Indeck et al.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,387, filed Nov. 21, 2011 (Indeck et al.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/316,332, filed Dec. 9, 2011 (Taylor et al.). |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/570,670, filed Dec. 14, 2011 (Taylor et al.). |
Ibrahim et al., “Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Database and Expert Systems Applications”, 2000, p. 769, vol. 1873, Springer. |
Mueller, “Upgrading and Repairing PCs, 15th Anniversary Edition”, 2004, pp. 63-66, 188, Que. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/077,224 dated May 9, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,340 dated May 9, 2012. |
Worboys, “GIS: A Computing Perspective”, 1995, pp. 245-247, 287, Taylor & Francis Ltd. |
Brodie et al., “Dynamic Reconfigurable Computing”, in Proc. of 9th Military and Aerospace Programmable Logic Devices International Conference, Sep. 2006. |
Forgy, “RETE: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Matching Problem”, Artificial Intelligence, 1982, pp. 17-37, vol. 19. |
Gupta et al., “High-Speed Implementations of Rule-Based Systems,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, May 1989, pp. 119-146, vol. 7, Issue 2. |
Gupta et al., “PMM: A Parallel Architecture for Production Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Apr. 1992, pp. 693-696, vol. 2. |
Tau et al., “Transit Note #114: A First Generation DPGA Implementation”, Jan. 1995, 9 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/421,545, filed Dec. 9, 2010 (Taylor et al.). |
Amendment with RCE filed for U.S. Appl. No. 11/561,615, dated Jul. 1, 2011. |
“Lucent Technologies Delivers “PayloadPlus” Network Processors for Programmable, MultiProtocol, OC-48c Processing”, Lucent Technologies Press Release, downloaded from http://www.lucent.com/press/1000/0010320.meb.html on Mar. 21, 2002. |
“Overview, Field Programmable Port Extender”, Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002, pp. 1-4. |
“Payload PlusO Agere System Interface”, Agere Systems Product Brief, Jun. 2001, downloaded from Internet, Jan. 2002, pp. 1-6. |
“The Field-Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, downloaded from http://www.arl.wustl.edu/arl/ in Mar. 2002. |
Aldwairi et al., “Configurable String Matching Hardware for Speeding up Intrusion Detection”, SIRARCH Comput. Archit. News, vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 99-107, Mar. 2005. |
Arnold et al., “The Splash 2 Processor and Applications”, Proceedings 1993 IEEE International Conference on Computer Design: VLSI in Computers and Processors (ICCD '93), Oct. 3, 1993, pp. 482-485, IEEE Computer Society, Cambridge, MA USA. |
Baer, “Computer Systems Architecture”, 1980, pp. 262-265; Computer Science Press, Potomac, Maryland. |
Baeza-Yates et al., “New and Faster Filters for Multiple Approximate String Matching”, Random Structures and Algorithms (RSA), Jan. 2002, pp. 23-49, vol. 20, No. 1. |
Baker et al., “High-throughput Linked-Pattern Matching for Intrusion Detection Systems”, ANCS 2005: Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Architecture for Networking and Communications Systems, pp. 193-202, ACM Press, 2005. |
Barone-Adesi et al., “Efficient Analytic Approximation of American Option Values”, Journal of Finance, vol. 42, No. 2 (Jun. 1987), pp. 301-320. |
Braun et al., “Layered Protocol Wrappers for Internet Packet Processing in Reconfigurable Hardware”, Proceedings of Hot Interconnects 9 (HotI-9) Stanford, CA, Aug. 22-24, 2001, pp. 93-98. |
Chamberlain et al., “Achieving Real Data Throughput for an FPGA Co-Processor on Commodity Server Platforms”, Proc. of 1st Workshop on Building Block Engine Architectures for Computers and Networks, Oct. 2004, Boston, MA. |
Cho et al., “Deep Packet Filter with Dedicated Logic and Read Only Memories”, 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 2004. |
Choi et al., “Design of a Flexible Open Platform for High Performance Active Networks”, Allerton Conference, 1999, Champaign, IL. |
Clark et al., “Scalable Pattern Matching for High Speed Networks”, Proceedings of the 12th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, 2004; FCCM 2004, Apr. 20-23, 2004; pp. 249-257; IEEE Computer Society; Cambridge, MA USA. |
Cloutier et al., “VIP: An FPGA-Based Processor for Image Processing and Neural Networks”, Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Microelectronics for Neural Networks, Feb. 12, 1996, pp. 330-336, Los Alamitos, California. |
Compton et al., “Configurable Computing: A Survey of Systems and Software”, Technical Report, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, 1999. |
Compton et al., “Reconfigurable Computing: A Survey of Systems and Software”, Technical Report, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, 1999, presented by Yi-Gang Tai. |
Cong et al., “An Optional Technology Mapping Algorithm for Delay Optimization in Lookup-Table Based FPGA Designs”, IEEE, 1992, pp. 48-53. |
Crosman, “Who Will Cure Your Data Latency?”, Storage & Servers, Jun. 20, 2007, URL: http://www.networkcomputing.com/article/printFullArticleSrc.jhtml?article ID=199905630. |
Department of Computer Science & Engineering; “Technical Reports”; Publication (http://cse.seas.wustl.edu/Research/Publications.asp); Dec. 17, 2007; pp. 1-26; Washington University in St. Louis. |
Ebeling et al., “RaPiD—Reconfigurable Pipelined Datapath”, University of Washington, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, Sep. 23, 1996, Seattle, WA. |
Franklin et al., “An Architecture for Fast Processing of Large Unstructured Data Sets.” Proc. of 22nd Intl Conf. on Computer Design, Oct. 2004, pp. 280-287. |
Franklin et al., “Assisting Network Intrusion Detection with Reconfigurable Hardware”, Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM 2002), Apr. 2002, Napa, California. |
Fu et al., “The FPX KCPSM Module: An Embedded, Reconfigurable Active Processing Module for the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-01-14, Jul. 2001. |
Halaas et al., “A Recursive MISD Architecture for Pattern Matching”, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration, vol. 12, No. 7, pp. 727-734, Jul. 2004. |
Harris, “Pete's Blog: Can FPGAs Overcome the FUD?”, Low-Latency.com, May 14, 2007, URL: http://www.a-teamgroup.com/article/pete-blog-can-fpgas-overcome-the-fud/. |
Hauck et al., “Software Technologies for Reconfigurable Systems”, Northwestern University, Dept. of ECE, Technical Report, 1996. |
Hezel et al., “FPGA-Based Template Matching Using Distance Transforms”, Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 22, 2002, pp. 89-97, IEEE Computer Society, USA. |
Hirsch, “Tech Predictions for 2008”, Reconfigurable Computing, Jan. 16, 2008, URL: http://fpgacomputing.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html. |
Hollaar, “Hardware Systems for Text Information Retrieval”, Proceedings of the Sixth Annual International ACM Sigir Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Jun. 6-8, 1983, pp. 3-9, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. |
Hutchings et al., “Assisting Network Intrusion Detection with Reconfigurable Hardware”, FCCM 2002: 10th Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, 2002. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2009/030623 dated May 5, 2009. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/065955 dated Aug. 22, 2008. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/066929 dated Aug. 29, 2008. |
Keutzer et al., “A Survey of Programmable Platforms—Network Proc”, University of California-Berkeley, pp. 1-29. |
Lin et al., “Real-Time Image Template Matching Based on Systolic Array Processor”, International Journal of Electronics; Dec. 1, 1992; pp. 1165-1176; vol. 73, No. 6; London, Great Britain. |
Lockwood et al., “Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX) for Distributed Routing and Queuing”, ACM International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA 2000), Monterey, CA, Feb. 2000, pp. 137-144. |
Lockwood et al., “Hello, World: A Simple Application for the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-00-12, Jul. 11, 2000. |
Lockwood et al., “Parallel FPGA Programming over Backplane Chassis”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report WUCS-00-11, Jun. 12, 2000. |
Lockwood et al., “Reprogrammable Network Packet Processing on the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, ACM International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA 2001), Monterey, CA, Feb. 2001, pp. 87-93. |
Lockwood, “An Open Platform for Development of Network Processing Modules in Reprogrammable Hardware”, IEC DesignCon 2001, Santa Clara, CA, Jan. 2001, Paper WB-19. |
Lockwood, “Building Networks with Reprogrammable Hardware”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Evolvable Internet Hardware Platforms”, NASA/DoD Workshop on Evolvable Hardware (EHW'01), Long Beach, CA, Jul. 12-14, 2001, pp. 271-279. |
Lockwood, “Hardware Laboratory Configuration”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Introduction”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Platform and Methodology for Teaching Design of Hardware Modules in Internet Routers and Firewalls”, IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Microelectronic Systems Education (MSE'2001), Las Vegas, NV, Jun. 17-18, 2001, pp. 56-57. |
Lockwood, “Protocol Processing on the FPX”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Simulation and Synthesis”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Lockwood, “Simulation of the Hello World Application for the Field-Programmable Port Extender (FPX)”, Washington University, Applied Research Lab, Spring 2001 Gigabits Kits Workshop. |
Mosanya et al., “A FPGA-Based Hardware Implementation of Generalized Profile Search Using Online Arithmetic”, ACM/Sigda International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA '99), Feb. 21-23, 1999, pp. 101-111, Monterey, CA, USA. |
Moscola et al., “FPGrep and FPSed: Regular Expression Search and Substitution for Packet Streaming in Field Programmable Hardware”, Dept. of Computer Science, Applied Research Lab, Washington University, Jan. 8, 2002, unpublished, pp. 1-19, St. Louis, MO. |
Moscola et al., “FPSed: A Streaming Content Search-and-Replace Module for an Internet Firewall”, Proc. of Hot Interconnects, 11th Symposium on High Performance Interconnects, pp. 122-129, Aug. 20, 2003. |
Navarro, “A Guided Tour to Approximate String Matching”, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 33, No. 1, Mar. 2001, pp. 31-88. |
Nunez et al., “The X-MatchLITE FPGA-Based Data Compressor”, Euromicro Conference 1999, Proceedings, Italy, Sep. 8-10, 1999, pp. 126-132, Los Alamitos, CA. |
Pramanik et al., “A Hardware Pattern Matching Algorithm on a Dataflow”; Computer Journal; Jul. 1, 1985; pp. 264-269; vol. 28, No. 3; Oxford University Press, Surrey, Great Britain. |
Ramakrishna et al., “A Performance Study of Hashing Functions for Hardware Applications”, Int. Conf. on Computing and Information, May 1994, pp. 1621-1636, vol. 1, No. 1. |
Ramakrishna et al., “Efficient Hardware Hashing Functions for High Performance Computers”, IEEE Transactions on Computers, Dec. 1997, vol. 46, No. 12. |
Ratha et al., “Convolution on Splash 2”, Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on FPGAS for Custom Computing Machines, Apr. 19, 1995, pp. 204-213, Los Alamitos, California. |
Ratha et al., “FPGA-based coprocessor for text string extraction”, IEEE, Sep. 11-13, 2000, pp. 217-221. |
Roesch, “Snort—Lightweight Intrusion Detection for Networks”, Proceedings of LISA '99: 13th Systems Administration Conference; Nov. 7-12, 1999; pp. 229-238; USENIX Association, Seattle, WA USA. |
Roy, “A bounded search algorithm for segmented channel routing for FPGA's and associated channel architecture issues”, IEEE, Nov. 11, 1993, pp. 1695-1705, vol. 12. |
Schmerken, “With Hyperfeed Litigation Pending, Exegy Launches Low-Latency Ticker Plant”, in Wall Street & Technology Blog, Mar. 20, 2007, pp. 1-2. |
Schmit, “Incremental Reconfiguration for Pipelined Applications”, FPGAs for Custom Computing Machines, Proceedings, The 5th Annual IEEE Symposium, Dept. of ECE, Carnegie Mellon University, Apr. 16-18, 1997, pp. 47-55, Pittsburgh, PA. |
Shah, “Understanding Network Processors”, Version 1.0, University of California-Berkeley, Sep. 4, 2001. |
Shirazi et al., “Quantitative Analysis of FPGA-based Database Searching”, Journal of VLSI Signal Processing Systems for Signal, Image, and Video Technology, May 2001, pp. 85-96, vol. 28, No. 1/2, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, NL. |
Sidhu et al., “Fast Regular Expression Matching Using FPGAs”, IEEE Symposium on Field Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM 2001), Apr. 2001. |
Sidhu et al., “String Matching on Multicontext FPGAs Using Self-Reconfiguration”, FPGA '99: Proceedings of the 1999 ACM/SIGDA 7th International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays, Feb. 1999, pp. 217-226. |
Sourdis and Pnevmatikatos, “Fast, Large-Scale String Match for a 10Gbps FPGA-based Network Intrusion Detection System”, 13th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications, 2003. |
Tan et al., “A High Throughput String Matching Architecture for Intrusion Detection and Prevention”, ISCA 2005: 32nd Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pp. 112-122, 2005. |
Taylor et al., “Generalized RAD Module Interface Specification of the Field Programmable Port Extender (FPX) Version 2”, Washington University, Department of Computer Science, Technical Report, Jul. 5, 2001, pp. 1-10. |
Taylor et al., “Modular Design Techniques for the FPX”, Field Programmable Port Extender: Jan. 2002 Gigabit Workshop Tutorial, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Jan. 3-4, 2002. |
Taylor et al., “Scalable Packet Classification using Distributed Crossproducting of Field Labels”, Proceedings of IEEE Infocom, Mar. 2005, pp. 1-12, vol. 20, No. 1. |
Taylor, “Models, Algorithms, and Architectures for Scalable Packet Classification”, doctoral thesis, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2004, pp. 1-201. |
Thomson Reuters, “Mellanox InfiniBand Accelerates the Exegy Ticker Plant at Major Exchanges”, Jul. 22, 2008, URL: http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS125385+22-Jul-2008+BW20080722. |
Ward et al., “Dynamically Reconfigurable Computing: A Novel Computation Technology with Potential to Improve National Security Capabilities”, May 15, 2003, A White Paper Prepared by Star Bridge Systems, Inc. [retrieved Dec. 12, 2006]. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://www.starbridgesystems.com/resources/whitepapers/Dynamically%20Reconfigurable%20Computing.pdf. |
Web-Pop (Professional Options Package) (www.pmpublishing.com). |
Exegy Inc., “Exegy and HyperFeed to Unveil Exelerate TP at SIA Conference”, Release Date: Jun. 20, 2006, downloaded from: http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/488004 on Jun. 19, 2006, 4 pages. |
Exegy Inc., “First Exegy Ticker Plant Deployed”, Release date: Oct. 17, 2006, downloaded from: http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/496530 on Jun. 19, 2007, 5 pages. |
“DRC, Exegy Announce Joint Development Agreement”, Jun. 8, 2007 byline of Jun. 4, 2007, downloaded from: http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc/1595644. html on Jun. 19, 2007, 3 pages. |
“ACTIV Financial Announces Hardware Based Market Data Feed Processing Strategy”, For Release on Apr. 2, 2007, 2 pages. |
“ACTIV Financial Delivers Accelerated Market Data Feed”, Apr. 6, 2007 byline of Apr. 2, 2007, downloaded from: http://hpcwire.com/hpc.1346816.html on Jun. 19, 2007, 3 pages. |
Feldman, “High Frequency Traders Get Boost From FPGA Acceleration” Jun. 8, 2007, downloaded from: http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc.1600113.html on Jun. 19, 2007, 4 pages. |
“Technology Overview”, downloaded from the http://www.datasearchsystems.com/tech.htm on Apr. 19, 2004. |
West et al., “An FPGA-Based Search Engine for Unstructured Database”, Proc. of 2nd Workshop on Application Specific Processors, Dec. 2003, San Diego, CA. |
Chamberlain et al., “The Mercury System: Exploiting Truly Fast Hardware for Data Search”, Proc. of Workshop on Storage Network Architecture and Parallel I/Os, Sep. 2003, New Orleans, LA. |
Chamberlain et al., “The Mercury System: Embedding Computation Into Disk Drives”, 7th High Performance Embedded Computing Workshop, Sep. 2003, Boston, MA. |
Dharmapurikar, “Fast and Scalable Pattern Matching for Content Filtering”, ACM, ANCS 05, 2005, pp. 183-192. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 11/561,615 dated Sep. 28, 2009. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 10/550,323 dated Aug. 5, 2011. |
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 11/561,615 dated Sep. 12, 2011. |
“RFC793: Transmission Control Protocol, Darpa Internet Program, Protocol Specification”, Sep. 1981. |
Anerousis et al., “Using the AT&T Labs PacketScope for Internet Measurement, Design, and Performance Analysis”, Network and Distributed Systems Research Laboratory, AT&T Labs-Research, Florham, Park, NJ, Oct. 1997. |
Artan et al., “Multi-packet Signature Detection using Prefix Bloom Filters”, 2005, IEEE, pp. 1811-1816. |
Baboescu et al., “Scalable Packet Classification”. |
Bloom, “Space/Time Trade-offs in Hash Coding With Allowable Errors”, Communications of the ACM, Jul. 1970, pp. 422-426, vol. 13, No. 7, Computer Usage Company, Newton Upper Falls, Massachusetts, USA. |
Chaney et al., “Design of a Gigabit ATM Switch”, Washington University, St. Louis. |
Cuppu and Jacob, “Organizational Design Trade-Offs at the DRAM, Memory Bus and Memory Controller Level: Initial Results,” Technical Report UMB-SCA-1999-2, Univ. of Maryland Systems & Computer Architecture Group, Nov. 1999, pp. 1-10. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Deep Packet Inspection Using Parallel Bloom Filters,” Symposium on High Performance Interconnects (HotI), Stanford, California, 2003, pp. 44-51. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Longest Prefix Matching Using Bloom Filters,” SIGCOMM, 2003, pp. 201-212. |
Dharmapurikar et al., “Robust TCP Stream Reassembly in the Presence of Adversaries”, Proc. of the 14th Conference on USENIX Security Symposium—vol. 14, 16 pages, Baltimore, MD, 2005; http://www.icir.org/vern/papers/TcpReassembly/TCPReassembly.pdf. |
Feldmann, “BLT: Bi-Layer Tracing of HTTP and TCP/IP”, AT&T Labs-Research, Florham Park, NJ, USA. |
Gupta et al., “Packet Classification on Multiple Fields”, Computer Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. |
Gurtov, “Effect of Delays on TCP Performance”, Cellular Systems Development, Sonera Corporation. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2002/033286; dated Jan. 22, 2003. |
International Search Report for PCT/US2005/030046; dated Sep. 25, 2006. |
Jacobson et al., “RFC 1072: TCP Extensions for Long-Delay Paths”, Oct. 1988. |
Jacobson et al., “tcpdump—dump traffic on a network”. |
Johnson et al., “Pattern Matching in Reconfigurable Logic for Packet Classification”, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA. |
Madhusudan, “Design of a System for Real-Time Worm Detection”, Hot Interconnects, pp. 77-83, Stanford, CA, Aug. 2004, found at http://www.hoti.org/hoti12/program/papers/2004/paper4.2.pdf. |
Madhusudan, “Design of a System for Real-Time Worm Detection”, Master's Thesis, Washington Univ., Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2004. |
Madhusudan, “Design of a System for Real-Time Worm Detection”, Power Point Presentation in Support of Master's Thesis, Washington Univ., Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2004. |
Mao et al., “Cluster-based Online Monitoring System of Web Traffic”, Dept. of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua Univ., Bejing, 100084 P.R. China. |
Moscola, “FPGrep and FPSed: Packet Payload Processors for Managing the Flow of Digital Content on Local Area Networks and the Internet”, Master's Thesis, Sever Institute of Technology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, Aug. 2003. |
Necker et al., “TCP-Stream Reassembly and State Tracking in Hardware”, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA. |
Prakash et al., “OC-3072 Packet Classification Using BDDs and Pipelined SRAMs”, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin. |
Roberts, “Internet Still Growing Dramatically Says Internet Founder”, Press Release, Caspian Networks, Inc.—Virtual Pressroom. |
Schuehler et al., “Architecture for a Hardware Based, TCP/IP Content Scanning System”, IEEE Micro, 24(1):62-69, Jan.-Feb. 2004, USA. |
Schuehler et al., “TCP-Splitter: A TCP/IP Flow Monitor in Reconfigurable Hardware”, Hot Interconnects 10 (HotI-10), Stanford, CA, Aug. 21-23, 2002, pp. 127-131. |
Shalunov et al., “Bulk TCP Use and Performance on Internet 2”. |
Singh et al., “The EarlyBird System for Real-Time Detection on Unknown Worms”, Technical report CS2003-0761, Aug. 2003. |
Taylor et al., “Dynamic Hardware Plugins (DHP): Exploiting Reconfigurable Hardware for High-Performance Programmable Routers”, Computer Networks, 38(3): 295-310 (16), Feb. 21, 2002, and online at http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/AY2007/cs8803hpc_fall/papers/phplugins.pdf. |
Waldvogel et al., “Scalable High-Speed Prefix Matching”. |
Weaver et al., “Very Fast Containment of Scanning Worms”, Proc. USENIX Security Symposium 2004, San Diego, CA, Aug. 2004, located at http://www.icsi.berkely.edu/˜nweaver/containment/containment.pdf. |
Wooster et al., “HTTPDUMP Network HTTP Packet Snooper”, Apr. 25, 1996. |
Yan et al., “Enhancing Collaborative Spam Detection with Bloom Filters”, 2006, IEEE, pp. 414-425. |
Dehon, “DPGA-coupled microprocessors: commodity ICs for the early 21st Century”, FPGAS for Custom Computing Machines, 1994, Proceedings. IEEE Workshop on Napa Valley, CA, pp. 31-39, Los Alamitos, CA. |
Extended European Search Report for EP Application 09700535.9 dated Aug. 23, 2012. |
Gokhale et al, “Reconfigurable Computing: Accelerating Computation with Field-Programmable Gate Arrays”, Springer, 2005, pp. 1-36. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/076,982 dated Nov. 8, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/077,294 dated Dec. 26, 2012. |
Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,387 dated Jun. 6, 2012. |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/077,294 dated May 10, 2012. |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,340 dated May 9, 2012. |
Response to Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/301,387 dated Jun. 6, 2012. |
Adachi, “Yoku Wakaru Kinyu Sakimono Torihiki” (guidance for financial futures trading), Nippon Jitsugyo Publishing, Aug. 30, 1997, pp. 113-115 and pp. 221-227. |
Baker et al., “Time and Area Efficient Pattern Matching on FPGAs”, ACM, Feb. 22-24, 2004, pp. 223-232. |
Batory, “Modeling the Storage Architectures of Commercial Database Systems”, ACM Transactions on Database Systems, Dec. 1985, pp. 463-528, vol. 10, issue 4. |
Gokhale et al., “Reconfigurable Computing: Accelerating Computation with Field-Programmable Gate Arrays”, Springer, 2005, pp. 1-54, 92-96. |
Howe, Data Analysis for Database Design Third Edition, 2001, 335 pages, Butterworth-Heinemann. |
Office Action for JP Application 2010-542380 dated Jul. 30, 2013. |
Prosecution History for U.S. Appl. No. 13/077,294, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,600,856, filed Mar. 31, 2011 (Parsons et al.). |
Kunitomo, Database First Edition, Jun. 28, 2008, pp. 174-175, Juse Press, Ltd., Japan. |
Office Action for EP Application 09700535.9 dated Nov. 10, 2015. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20090182683 A1 | Jul 2009 | US |