Failure Triage in RTL Regression Verification
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
We propose an automated failure triage framework for register transfer level debugging in functional verification regression flows which unifies three critical aspects of the problem: the approximation of the general location of root-cause(s) in the design under verification, the binning of all related failures generated by regression runs, and the distribution of these binned failures to the proper engineer(s) for detailed analysis. The proposed triage engine entails two novel methodologies. The first is a classification framework that mines information from SAT-based debugging and simulation to probabilistically reason about the relation of root-causes with their respective failing verification traces. This enables the construction of a priority ranking for these root-causes, and can effectively guide debugging by focusing resources on high-priority root-causes. Second, we propose a formulation of failure binning as exemplar-based clustering for grouping and distributing failing traces to the proper engineering team(s). Experiments on industrial designs show that the proposed methodology achieves 84% and 81% accuracy when it comes to failure grouping and distribution, respectively, with only a 6.5% runtime overhead over existing debugging state-of-the-art techniques.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it