MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121718990 · doi:10.1109/dftvs.1991.199963

Almost sure diagnosis of almost every good element

2002· article· en· W2121718990 on OpenAlexaff
L.E. LaForge, Kaiyuan Huang, V.K. Agarwal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicSuspectElement (criminal law)Computer scienceChipDiceTest (biology)WaferInterconnectionReliability engineeringWafer testingEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsElectrical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an overview of a technical report by the same title. The authors consider the diagnosis of the dice on a semiconductor wafer, in which the processing element on each die contains logic that can test another die. The test circuitry is simplified when each die is the same, and this is an assumption of the model. Diagnosis with constant-degree digraphs is of practical interest to wafer-scale testing. In lieu of wafer probe the authors suggest the use of self-testing chips whose test arcs follow switchable interconnect laid along the scribe lines. Diagnosis of almost every good element is appropriate when it is acceptable for the manufacturer to throw away a small fraction of the good elements, but it is unacceptable for the manufacturer to package and sell a faulty chip. their results are new to the theory of system level diagnosis. Their approach offers an alternative to the testing of chips that have been probed or packaged. They suspect that this approach may be economically advantageous, and suggest that implementation of their proposed heuristic would be a worthwhile experiment.>

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.219
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207