MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1568583476 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2006.1693910

Testable and self-repairable structured logic design

2006· article· en· W1568583476 on OpenAlexaff
Uthman Alsaiari, R. Saleh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApplication-specific integrated circuitOverhead (engineering)Computer scienceTestabilityLogic synthesisProgrammable logic deviceDesign for testingLogic gateComputer architectureReliability engineeringEmbedded systemComputer engineeringEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep submicron technology is forcing designers away from traditional ASIC design styles toward structured arrays for the implementation of logic circuits. Structured arrays have many inherent benefits in terms of CAD tool design, testability and reliable fabrication. FPGAs and structured ASIC fabrics are two examples, but their speed, area and power overheads are high due to their programmability features. If programmability is removed, it is possible to reduce the overhead. Perhaps it is time to revisit the use of structured logic for fixed-function blocks, such as ROMs and PLAs, to determine if they are better-suited for this purpose. In particular, this paper investigates the PLA from the self-test and self-repair perspectives. ASIC blocks are known to have limitations in terms of self-test, but have little or no hope of providing self-repair. In contrast, this paper proposes straight-forward solutions for self-test and self-repair of PLAs. We find that it can provide 100% self-test coverage, and a very high probability of self-repair at the cost of area overhead

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207