Parameterized timing analysis with general delay models and arbitrary variation sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many recent techniques for timing analysis under variability, in which delay is an explicit function of underlying parameters, may be described as parameterized timing analysis. The "max" operator, used repeatedly during block-based timing analysis, causes several complications during parameterized timing analysis. We introduce bounds on, and an approximation to, the max operator which allow us to develop an accurate, general, and efficient approach to parameterized timing, which can handle either uncertain or random variations. Applied to random variations, the approach is competitive with existing statistical static timing analysis (SSTA) techniques, in that it allows for nonlinear delay models and arbitrary distributions. Applied to uncertain variations, the method is competitive with existing multi-corner STA techniques, in that it more reliably reproduces overall circuit sensitivity to variations. Crucially, this technique can also be applied to the mixed case where both random and uncertain variations are considered. Our results show that, on average, circuit delay is predicted with less than 2% error for multi-corner analysis, and less than 1% error for SSTA.
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 | 0.000 | 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".