MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109356829 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2005.852680

Fast detection of data retention faults and other SRAM cell open defects

2005· article· en· W2109356829 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersUniversité de BordeauxUniversité de MontpellierUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsStatic random-access memoryComputer scienceSpiceData retentionReduction (mathematics)Embedded systemPower (physics)Random access memoryRandom accessComputer hardwareElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of open defects in static random access memory (SRAM) cells, including those causing data retention faults (DRFs), is known to be difficult and time consuming. This paper proposes a novel design-for-test (DFT) technique that allows SRAMs to be tested at full speed for these defects. As a result, it achieves not only significant test time reduction but also full coverage of open defects, including those undetectable to previous solutions. The proposed technique is referred to as predischarge write test mode (PDWTM). Implementation of the proposed technique requires little design effort and imposes negligible hardware and performance penalties. Furthermore, the proposed technique can be easily merged with any March algorithm, thus resulting in full DRF and other SRAM cell open defect coverage. The proposed technique has been validated by SPICE simulation using both low-power and high-speed SRAM cells.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.183 · 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