MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111157339 · doi:10.1109/hldvt.2006.319996

Automated Coverage Directed Test Generation Using a Cell-Based Genetic Algorithm

2006· article· en· W2111157339 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

VenueProceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottleneckComputer scienceAlgorithmSet (abstract data type)SystemCDomain (mathematical analysis)Automatic test pattern generationGenetic algorithmCode coverageEmbedded systemSoftwareMathematicsMachine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional verification is a major challenge in the hardware design development cycle. Defining the appropriate coverage points that capture the design's functionalities is a non-trivial problem. However, the real bottleneck remains in generating the suitable testbenches that activate those coverage points adequately. In this paper, we propose an approach to enhance the coverage rate of multiple coverage points through the automatic generation of appropriate test patterns. We employ a directed random simulation, where directives are continuously updated until achieving acceptable coverage rates for all coverage points. We propose to model the solution of the test generation problem as sequences of directives or cells, each of them with specific width, height and distribution. Our approach is based on a genetic algorithm, which automatically optimizes the widths, heights and distributions of these cells over the whole input domain with the aim of enhancing the effectiveness of test generation. We illustrate the efficiency of our approach on a set of designs modeled in SystemC

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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