Design techniques for gate-leakage reduction in CMOS circuits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxide tunneling current in MOS transistors is fast becoming a non-negligible component of power consumption, as gate oxides get thinner, and could become in the future the dominant leakage mechanism in sub-100 nm CMOS circuits. In this paper, we present an analysis of static CMOS circuits from a gate-leakage point of view. We first consider the dependence of the gate current on various conditions for a single transistor and identify 3 main regions in which a MOS transistor will operate between clock transitions. The amount of gate-current differs by several orders of magnitude from one region to another. Whether a transistor will leak significantly or not is determined by its position in relation to other transistors within a structure. By comparing logically equivalent but structurally different CMOS circuits, we find that the gate current exhibits a 'structure dependence'. Also, the total gate-leakage in a given structure varies significantly for different combinations of inputs, from which we derive "state-dependent gate-leakage tables" that can be used to estimate the total amount of gate-current for a large circuit. Finally, we suggest guidelines aimed at reducing the amount of oxide-leakage current based on the presented structure and state dependencies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".