MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409013312 · doi:10.1109/tc.2015.2479617

Multiple-Bit Parity-Based Concurrent Fault Detection Architecture for Parallel CRC Computation

2015· article· en· W2409013312 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParity bitChecksumFault detection and isolationComputer scienceParallel computingAlgorithmOverhead (engineering)ComputationVery-large-scale integrationParity (physics)ArithmeticComputer engineeringMathematicsEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a result of huge advancements in VLSI technology, more and more complex circuits are being implemented making not only the whole digital system more prone to faults, but also the fault detector itself susceptible to faults resulting in the requirement of concurrent fault detection architecture of the encoders and decoders. In this paper, we present a multiple-bit parity-based fault detection architecture for parallel CRC computation. After analyzing the parallel implementation of CRC, we present a formulation to generate a multiple-bit parity prediction structure to incorporate the fault detection architecture. Using the formulations of digit level CRC architecture, the checksum is divided into few blocks and predicted multiple-bit parity of the blocks are compared with the actual parity bits. Finally, with the help of software simulation and ASIC implementation, we show that the proposed scheme is highly efficient in terms of fault detection capability whereas it involves small area and time overhead. As an example, we have shown that the worst case area overhead is <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$25.7$</tex-math></inline-formula> percent for CRC <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$-32$</tex-math></inline-formula> with four parity bits, and corresponding time overhead is <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$15.6$</tex-math></inline-formula> percent.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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