MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042451806 · doi:10.1109/mtv.2011.15

Overview of Applying Reachability Analysis to Verifying a Physical Microprocessor

2011· article· en· W2042451806 on OpenAlexaff
Robert deB. Johnston, O. Dahmoune

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEmbedded Systems Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMicroprocessorVHDLMicrocontrollerField-programmable gate arrayReachabilityEmbedded systemAbstractionInstruction setComputer architectureProgramming languageTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines the application of a Model-Checker to the functional verification of a microprocessor's physical electronic implementation. The goals are (1) testing at hardware speed, (2) reduced labor of test bench creation, and (3) a raised level of abstraction for the specifications. L. Lamport's TLC Model-Checker is used to verify a custom version of the Xilinx PicoBlaze Micro-Controller Unit (MCU), the MCU is specified in VHDL and implemented on a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). Experimental verification consists of showing that the physical device behavior conforms to a mathematical specification of its Instruction Set Architecture (ISA), for selected subsets of instructions and arguments.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEmbedded Systems Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207