MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073750011 · doi:10.1260/1708-5284.11.3.279

Low-level logic fault testing ASIC simulation environment

2014· article· en· W2073750011 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mansour H. Assaf, Leslie-Ann Moore, Sunil R. Das, Satyendra N. Biswas, Scott Morton

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFault SimulatorBenchmark (surveying)Application-specific integrated circuitFault coverageCombinational logicFault (geology)Automatic test pattern generationComputer scienceLogic simulationDigital electronicsSequential logicEmbedded systemBuilt-in self-testStuck-at faultEngineeringLogic gateElectronic circuitElectronic engineeringFault detection and isolationElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A low-level logic fault test simulation environment targeted towards application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) in particular is proposed in this paper. The simulation environment emulates a typical built-in self-testing (BIST) environment with test pattern generator (TPG) that sends its outputs to a circuit (core) under test (CUT) and the output streams from the CUT are fed into an output response analyzer (ORA). The developed simulator is very suitable for testing embedded digital intellectual property (IP) cores-based systems. The paper describes the total test architecture environment, including the application of the logic fault simulator. Results on simulation on some specific International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS) 85 combinational and ISCAS 89 sequential benchmark circuits are provided as well for appraisal.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EngineeringSame topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207