Modeling and verification of DSP designs in HOL
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis we propose a framework for the incorporation of formal methods in the design flow of DSP (Digital Signal Processing) systems in a rigorous way. In the proposed approach we model and verify DSP descriptions at different abstraction levels using higher-order logic based on the HOL (Higher Order Logic) theorem prover. This framework enables the formal verification of DSP designs which in the past could only be done partially using conventional simulation techniques. To this end, we provide a shallow embedding of DSP descriptions in HOL at the floating-point, fixed-point, behavioral, RTL (Register Transfer Level), and netlist gate levels. We make use of existing formalization of floating-point theory in HOL and introduce a parallel one for fixed-point arithmetic. The high ability of abstraction in HOL allows a seamless hierarchical verification encompassing the whole DSP design path, starting from top level floating- and fixed-point algorithmic descriptions down to RTL, and gate level implementations. We illustrate the new verification framework using different case studies such as digital filters and FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) algorithms.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it