Investigation of Process Impact on Soft Error Susceptibility of Nanometric SRAMs Using a Compact Critical Charge Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nanometric SRAMs are more vulnerable to experiencing particle induced soft error due to lower operating voltages coupled with higher packing density and increased process variations. In this paper, we present a compact model for critical charge of a 6T SRAM cell for estimating the effects of process variations on its soft error susceptibility. The model is based on dynamic behavior of the cell and a simple decoupling technique for the non-linearly coupled storage nodes. The model describes the critical charge in terms of transistor parameters, cell supply voltage, and injected current parameters. Consequently, it enables investigating the spread of critical charge due to process induced variations in these parameters and to manufacturing defects, such as, resistive contacts or vias. In addition, the model can estimate the improvement in critical charge when MIM capacitors are added to the cell in order to improve the soft error robustness. The critical charge calculated by the model is in good agreement with SPICE simulations for a commercial 90 nm CMOS process with a maximum discrepancy of less than 5%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".