On the design of at-speed testable VLSI circuits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a new design-for-testability technique for sequential circuits is presented. This technique may be considered as an alternative to full scan. The fault coverages obtained with this technique are comparable to those produced by full scan techniques. However, the present method improves full scan in several ways. The application test time of a device is reduced to that of applying parallel vectors at the operational speed. This characteristic of applying test vectors at the operational speed has a positive impact on the test quality. Indeed, a stuck-at test, applied at the operational speed of the circuit, identifies more defective chips than the same test applied at a lower speed. Furthermore, the timing and the area overheads, which are often considered to be serious disadvantages of DFT techniques, are in this case acceptable. With this method, all FFs are replaced with XFF gates. The XFF gate is similar to a T flip-flop without feedback. However, in some cases, when observability problems are still important, a probe observation point is inserted at the pseudo-primary inputs (PPIs).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".