MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041112028 · doi:10.1109/icecs.2006.379885

Testing QCA Modular Logic

2006· article· en· W2041112028 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum-Dot Cellular Automata
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombinational logicModular designComputer scienceTestabilityLogic gateSequential logicComplement (music)Logic synthesisAlgorithmEngineeringReliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a design for testability of arbitrary combinational quantum dot cellular automata (QCA) logic, which facilitates its functionality testing. Any combinational logic can be implemented using only AND-OR gates (with negated signals available), and in QCA this results in reduced test set. Previously this strategy was proposed for QCA testing considering only primary inputs (either true or complemented, but not both) feeding different majority voters, which fails for general circuits where fan-outs are allowed for primary inputs and their complement. In this paper we propose a design scheme that enables testing of any combinational QCA circuit.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQuantum-Dot Cellular AutomataFrench-language works237,207