MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968010872 · doi:10.1145/1785481.1785497

Stochastic computational models for accurate reliability evaluation of logic circuits

2010· article· en· W1968010872 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Chen, Jie Han

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputational complexity theoryReliability (semiconductor)ScalabilityBinary decision diagramVery-large-scale integrationElectronic circuitComputationLogic gateRepresentation (politics)AlgorithmCMOSTheoretical computer scienceComputer engineeringElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As reliability becomes a major concern with the continuous scaling of CMOS technology, several computational methodologies have been developed for the reliability evaluation of logic circuits. Previous accurate analytical approaches, however, have a computational complexity that generally increases exponentially with the size of a circuit, making the evaluation of large circuits intractable. This paper presents novel computational models based on stochastic computation, in which probabilities are encoded in the statistics of random binary bit streams, for the reliability evaluation of logic circuits. A computational approach using the stochastic computational models (SCMs) accurately determines the reliability of a circuit with its precision only limited by the random fluctuations inherent in the representation of random binary bit streams. The SCM approach has a linear computational complexity and is therefore scalable for use for any large circuits. Our simulation results demonstrate the accuracy and scalability of the SCM approach, and suggest its possible applications in VLSI design.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations58
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207