MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922915833 · doi:10.1109/icvd.2000.812609

Hierarchical test generation for systems on a chip

2002· article· en· W1922915833 on OpenAlexaff
R.S. Tupuri, Jacob A. Abraham, D.G. Saab

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersSemiconductor Research Corporation
KeywordsTestabilityDesign for testingAutomatic test pattern generationComputer scienceSystem on a chipEmbedded systemChipLogic synthesisComputer architectureCore (optical fiber)Logic gateReliability engineeringEngineeringElectronic circuitAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid increase in functionality on a single chip in the last few years has increased the gap between the complexity of the design and the capability of commercial test tools. In particular the test needs for systems on a chip (SOC) are not addressed by existing tools. Because some of the cores integrated on a single SOC may not have embedded testability features, it is not always possible to use conventional design for testability (DFT) methodologies directly. This paper presents a novel approach for generating tests for complex SOCs which targets one module (or core) at a time, by extracting its environment elegantly in the form of constraints and storing it as virtual logic. Information about the core processor and internal bus is used to reduce the size of the virtual logic so that a commercial ATPG tool can be used to generate tests. These tests are then automatically translated to system-level tests. The approach is illustrated with an example SOC based on the picoJava core.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207