A novel theory on parallel repeater‐insertion methodologies for long on‐chip interconnects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Repeaters are now widely used to enhance the performance of long on‐chip interconnects in CMOS devices. For RC‐as well as RLC‐modeled interconnects, parallel repeaters (PRs) have proved to be superior to serial ones. In a previous work, a new regeneration technique, named variable‐segment, was proven to outperform other existing regeneration techniques including variable‐repeater techniques. In this paper, an approximate analytical delay model is presented for both the variable‐repeater and variable‐segment parallel regeneration techniques. This model is used to confirm the optimality of our design and is built based on first and second‐moment transfer functions, which take into account the inductive effects of interconnects. HSpice electrical and C + +/MATLAB simulations are conducted to assess the performance of the proposed optimization methodology using 0.25‐µm CMOS technology. The mathematical simulation results are remarkably in agreement with those obtained from electrically simulated variable‐repeater and variable‐segment structures which are used in this work to regenerate interconnect lengths ranging from 0.1 to 10 cm. This work is part of a first‐of‐its‐kind global theory on PRs in repeater‐insertion methodologies for long on‐chip interconnects. This theory aims at exploring the different degrees of freedom in interconnect modeling as well as repeater type and design parameters. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 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".