MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143096499 · doi:10.1109/43.905677

Delay and current estimation in a CMOS inverter with an RC load

2001· article· en· W2143096499 on OpenAlexaff
M.M. Hafed, Mourad Oulmane, N.C. Rumin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverterCapacitanceCMOSTransistorVoltageElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)Electrical engineeringMathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel and efficient method is presented for computing the delay and supply current pulse in a CMOS inverter with an RC load. The method builds on existing techniques for computing these quantities in the presence of a capacitance load. As in the work of other authors, the concept of an effective capacitance C/sub eff/ is used. However, here it captures the inverter's behavior only while the charging/discharging transistor is in saturation and, therefore, behaves like a current source to a good approximation. This capacitance is determined by means of a simple iterative procedure that uses an empirical piecewise-linear approximation to the RC circuit's output voltage, which has a normal CMOS symmetrical form. Since a C/sub eff/ defined in the above way is independent of the inverter's parameters, such as transistor size, the coefficients of the approximation have to be determined for only one reference inverter. A simple analytical method yields the inverter's output voltage outside the saturation region. The complete model has been shown to be accurate for both 0.8-/spl mu/m 5-V and 0.24-/spl mu/m 2.5-V CMOS technologies. Its speed is comparable to that of the "capacitance load" techniques that it relies on.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207