MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111647680 · doi:10.5555/1870926.1871124

Practical Monte-Carlo based timing yield estimation of digital circuits

2010· article· en· W2111647680 on OpenAlexaff
Javid Jaffari, Mohab Anis

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign, Automation, and Test in Europe · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariance reductionMonte Carlo methodEstimatorControl variatesSkewReduction (mathematics)Benchmark (surveying)Importance samplingElectronic circuitComputer scienceAlgorithmStatisticsDigital electronicsMathematicsHybrid Monte CarloMarkov chain Monte CarloEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advanced sampling and variance reduction techniques as efficient alternatives to the slow crude-MC method have recently been adopted for the analysis of timing yield in digital circuits. However, these techniques, the Quasi-MC method and the order-statistics base estimator, are prone to bias or negligible improvement upon the crude-MC method when an early-stage timing analysis with few (10s) simulation iterations can be afforded. In this paper, these issues are studied and a control variate-base technique is developed to accurately estimate the moments of circuits' critical delays with very few timing simulation iterations. A skew-normal distribution is then used to form a closed-form cumulative distribution function of timing yield. Analysis of the benchmark circuits shows 3--10X reduction of the confidence interval ranges of the estimated yield compared to the crude-MC translating to 9--100X reduction in the number of samples for the same analysis accuracy.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDesign, Automation, and Test in EuropeSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207