MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011740649 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2012.6335054

Clock tree structure with reduced wire length using the matched-delay skew compensation technique

2012· article· en· W2011740649 on OpenAlexaff
S. E. Esmaeili, Ali Mohammadi Farhangi, A.J. Al-Khalili, Glenn Cowan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkewFLOPSClock skewFlip-flopComputer scienceAlgorithmLatency (audio)Benchmark (surveying)Timing failureParallel computingJitterClock signalTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose a new approach to balance skew in the clock network by manipulating the operating speed of the flip-flop. Six versions of the master-slave flip-flop with different data to output (TDQ) delays are used in a matched-delay skew compensation technique. The TDQdelay in each version of the flip-flop was increased by increasing the channel length of transistors in intermediate stages of the flip-flop. Distributing flip-flops according to their delay requirements reduces the effect of clock skew on the outputs of sequentially adjacent flip-flops. Furthermore, it increases skew bounds required by algorithms to balance the skew in the clock distribution network leading to reduced design complexity. Constructing five benchmark clock trees with a Modified Deferred Merge Embedding (MDME) algorithm with four, five, and six versions of the flip-flop shows that the matched-delay skew compensation technique can compensate for a skew up to 15% of the clock period. In addition, matched-delay skew compensation achieves a reduction in total wire length and wire elongation up to 16.6% and 56.8%, respectively, as compared to the traditional DME algorithm with only one flip-flop.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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