MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123205813 · doi:10.1109/fmcad.2008.ecp.9

BackSpace: Formal Analysis for Post-Silicon Debug

2008· article· en· W2123205813 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSemiconductor Research Corporation
KeywordsDebuggingComputer scienceImplementationEmbedded systemOverhead (engineering)Software bugChipFormal verificationSystem on a chipState (computer science)Computer architectureSilicon chipComputer engineeringSiliconSoftware engineeringProgramming languageSoftwareTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-silicon debug is the problem of determining what's wrong when the fabricated chip of a new design behaves incorrectly. This problem now consumes over half of the overall verification effort on large designs, and the problem is growing worse. We introduce a new paradigm for using formal analysis, augmented with some on-chip hardware support, to automatically compute error traces that lead to an observed buggy state, thereby greatly simplifying the post-silicon debug problem. Our preliminary simulation experiments demonstrate the potential of our approach: we can "backspace" hundreds of cycles from randomly selected states of some sample designs. Our preliminary architectural studies propose some possible implementations and show that the on-chip overhead can be reasonable. We conclude by surveying future research directions.

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 score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Quick stats

Citations91
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207