MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991073801 · doi:10.1109/mdt.2007.131

Empirical Validation of Yield Recovery Using Idle-Cycle Insertion

2007· article· en· W1991073801 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Design & Test of Computers · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersNvidiaAdvanced Micro DevicesSemiconductor Research Corporation
KeywordsIdleComputer scienceChipYield (engineering)Power (physics)Reliability engineeringReal-time computingEmbedded systemElectronic engineeringEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The act of applying a scan-based delay test to a chip can cause electrical disturbances in the power and clock distribution networks that affect the results of the test, either for better or for worse. Empirical data presented in this study suggest that altering the details of the delay test application protocol can have a significant effect on the test results, and thus the yield of the product being tested. Specifically, inserting wait states between scan shifting and the launch clock results in measurable yield improvement. Although the exact mechanisms involved remain elusive, the authors were able to eliminate several possibilities through a series of experiments. It is clear from these experiments that yield recovery is a real phenomenon, and that launch delay (LD) tests can help to recover from IR drop.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.298
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