MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001402339 · doi:10.1109/iolts.2013.6604052

Accelerating post silicon debug of deep electrical faults

2013· article· en· W2001402339 on OpenAlexaff
Long Bao Le, Dipanjan Sengupta, Andreas Veneris, Zissis Poulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingTree traversalComputer scienceRoot causeTRACE (psycholinguistics)Reduction (mathematics)Embedded systemBenchmark (surveying)Automatic test pattern generationState (computer science)ChipCrashPath (computing)Reliability engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringAlgorithmElectronic circuitTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing complexity of current designs and shrinking time-to-market, traditional ATPG methods fail to detect all electrical faults in the design. Debug teams have to spend considerable amount of time and effort to identify these faults during post silicon debug. This work proposes off-chip analysis to speed-up the effort of identifying hard-to-find electrical faults that are not detected using conventional test methods, but cause the chip to crash during functional testing or silicon-bring-up. With the goal of reducing the search space for reconstructing the failure trace path, formal methodology is used to analyze the reachable states along the path. Isolating the root cause of failure is also accelerated. Moreover, we propose a forward traversal technique on selected few possible faults to generate a complete failure trace starting from the initial state to the crash state. Experimental results show that the proposed approach can lead to a 44% reduction in actual silicon run with a commensurate reduction in off-chip debug 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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure AnalysisFrench-language works237,207