MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772234823 · doi:10.1109/tcad.2017.2783303

Failure Triage in RTL Regression Verification

2017· article· en· W2772234823 on OpenAlexaff
Zissis Poulos, Andreas Veneris

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingComputer scienceRoot causeRanking (information retrieval)Overhead (engineering)Data miningTriageCluster analysisRoot (linguistics)Root cause analysisReliability engineeringMachine learningProgramming languageEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and SystemsSame topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207