MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983334556 · doi:10.1109/tsm.2012.2192143

NBTI and Process Variations Compensation Circuits Using Adaptive Body Bias

2012· article· en· W1983334556 on OpenAlexaff
Hassan Mostafa, Mohab Anis, M. Elmasry

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegative-bias temperature instabilityCMOSTransistorReliability (semiconductor)Static random-access memoryMicroprocessorElectronic engineeringCircuit reliabilityThreshold voltageProcess (computing)Process cornersChipComputer scienceElectronic circuitEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringEmbedded systemPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliability and variability have become big design challenges facing submicrometer high-speed applications and microprocessors designers. A low area overhead adaptive body bias (ABB) circuit is proposed in this paper to compensate for negative-bias temperature instability (NBTI) aging and process variations to improve the system reliability and yield. The proposed ABB circuit consists of a threshold voltage-sensing circuit and an on-chip analog controller. In this paper, post-layout simulation results, referring to an industrial hardware-calibrated STMicroelectronics 65-nm CMOS technology transistor model, are presented. The transistor model contains process variations and NBTI aging model cards, which are declared by STMicroelectronics to be Silicon verified. Cadence RelXpert, Virtuoso Spectre, and Virtuoso UltraSim tools are used to estimate the NBTI aging and process variations impacts on a circuit block case study, extracted from a real microprocessor critical path. These results show that the proposed ABB compensates effectively for NBTI aging and process variations. For example, the proposed ABB improves the timing yield from 74.4% to 99.7% at zero aging time and from 36.6% to 97.1% at 10 years aging time. In addition, the proposed ABB increases the total yield from 67% to 99.5% at zero aging time and from 35.9% to 97.1% at 10 years aging time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Semiconductor ManufacturingSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207