MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162143035 · doi:10.1109/test.1995.529850

Re-examining the needs of the mixed-signal test community

2002· article· en· W2162143035 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon W. Roberts

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Test equipmentComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Automatic test equipmentDevice under testReliability engineeringMixed-signal integrated circuitEngineeringTelecommunicationsIntegrated circuitOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The price of an increasing number of mixed-signal devices is presently being dominated by the cost of performing production testing. Probably the two most important factors affecting this cost are the direct cost of the test equipment and the time that a device-under-test (DUT) spends on that equipment. Another factor is the indirect cost incurred when test development time becomes the critical step in the manufacture of new devices. The cost of mixed-signal testers is exceedingly high on account of their requirement for both digital and analog test equipment with very high-performance capabilities. Moreover, the time the device spends on these testers can be on the order of minutes. The author discusses the problems outlined and makes some recommendations for the test community at large.

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 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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207