MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044645291 · doi:10.1109/vlsid.2013.145

Tutorial T10: Post - Silicon Validation, Debug and Diagnosis

2013· article· en· W2044645291 on OpenAlexaff
Prabhat Mishra, Masahiro Fujita, Virendra Singh, N. Tamarapalli, Sharad Kumar, Rajesh Mittal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingComputer scienceObservabilityEmbedded systemOverhead (engineering)Software engineeringSoftware bugReliability engineeringSystems engineeringSoftwareComputer architectureEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given, as follows. The complete presentation was not made available for publication as part of the conference proceedings. Drastic increase in design complexity along with the emergence of new failure mechanisms in the nanometer regime has led to significant increase in the complexity of verification, validation, and debug of integrated circuits. In spite of extensive efforts, it is not always possible to detect all the functional errors and electrical faults during pre-silicon validation. Post-silicon validation is used to detect design flaws including the escaped functional errors as well as electrical faults. In this tutorial, we will provide a comprehensive coverage of both fundamental concepts and recent advances in post-silicon validation, debug and diagnosis. The tutorial presenters (3 industry experts and 3 faculty members) will provide unique perspectives on both academic research and industrial practices. First, we will discuss various challenges associated with post-silicon validation and debug. Next, we will describe various techniques for automated generation of directed tests to activate both functional errors and electrical faults. We will cover recent advances in observability enhancement through signal selection and low-overhead trace hardware design. We will also describe various state-of-the-art post-silicon debug approaches for modern microprocessors and SoC designs. Next, we will present examples of real-life design failures, and successful debug scenarios in industrial settings. Finally, we will conclude the tutorial with discussion on emerging issues and future directions for successful postsilicon validation and debug.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.043

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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