MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2540054844 · doi:10.1109/idt.2011.6123104

An electrical-aware parametric DFM solution for analog circuits

2011· article· en· W2540054844 on OpenAlexaff
Rami Fathy, Ahmed Arafa, Sherif Hany, Abdelrahman ElMously, Haitham Eissa, Mohamed Dessouky, David Nairn, Mohab Anis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Semiconductor Devices and Circuit Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesign for manufacturabilityParametric statisticsComputer scienceElectronic circuitAnalogue electronicsElectronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, many of the approaches that are commonly referred to as physical DFM techniques only address catastrophic defects and systematic process variations. These techniques include spreading wires, doubling vias, identification of critical areas in the circuit that are especially susceptible to defects, and identification of proximity effects caused by the lithography process. However, physical DFM tools are purely “geometric”, in that they work to preserve shape fidelity without any knowledge of the impact on the electrical characteristics of the shapes that are manufactured in silicon. While these techniques have proven useful in reducing functional failures and increasing overall yield by a few percentage points, they completely ignore the more important category of parametric failures. The proposed solution presented in this chapter specifically helps to address the parametric performance modeling problems encountered at smaller geometries. As this solution drives design requirements into physical layout design and moves layout awareness upstream into design, useful information about the design (on the physical and electrical level) is captured, analyzed, and simulated. Deviations in the electrical characteristics due to physical layout and process variations, are identified and highlighted on the design. These deviations are referred as electrical hotspots (e-hotspots). To validate this work, The proposed e-hotspot detection engine is verified against silicon wafer data for a level shifter circuit designed at 130nm. The e-hotspot devices with high variation in DC current and causing parametric failure, are identified.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvancements in Semiconductor Devices and Circuit DesignFrench-language works237,207