MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164564825 · doi:10.1109/ftcs.1991.146656

Multiple fault analysis using a fault dropping technique

2002· article· en· W2164564825 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Fault (geology)Set (abstract data type)Combinational logicStuck-at faultComputer scienceAutomatic test pattern generationAlgorithmSpeedupElectronic circuitFault coverageParallel computingFault detection and isolationLogic gateEngineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for analyzing multiple faults in gate-level combinational circuits that does not explicitly enumerate all the multiple stuck-at faults that may be present in a circuit is presented. First, a fault collapsing phase is applied to the network, so that equivalent faults are eliminated. During the analysis, frontier faults where there is at least a normal path from each faulty line to a primary output are considered. It is shown that the set of frontier faults is equivalent to the set of multiple faults. Given an input vector, the normal circuit is evaluated and the fault effects propagated. A fault dropping procedure is then applied to eliminate faulty conditions on specific lines that are either absent or permanently masked by other faulty conditions. The method is applied to some benchmark circuits, and significant speedup is observed.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207