MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2403319193 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2015.2481874

On-Chip Cube-Based Constrained-Random Stimuli Generation for Post-Silicon Validation

2015· article· en· W2403319193 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersIntel Corporation
KeywordsComputer scienceChipCube (algebra)Volume (thermodynamics)Representation (politics)Embedded systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-silicon validation is critical for exposing subtle design errors that have escaped to the silicon prototypes. Its effectiveness is conditioned by in-system application of a large volume of functionally-compliant stimuli. In this paper, we present a methodology to design constrained-random stimuli generators, which are placed on-chip and are configurable at design-time to generate in-system functionally-compliant stimuli subject to user-programmable constraints provided at validation time. Central to our method is a cube-based representation of constraints. These cubes are used as masks that force pseudo-random sequences to map onto functionally-compliant stimuli. To reduce the on-chip storage requirements, masks are compressed at design-time and expanded on-the-fly at validation time using decompression circuitry. Experimental results evaluate the impact of our method on the requirements for on-chip logic and memory resources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.176 · 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