MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145435162 · doi:10.1109/date.2010.5456904

Enabling efficient post-silicon debug by clustering of hardware-assertions

2010· article· en· W3145435162 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebuggingComputer scienceAssertionBackground debug mode interfaceEmbedded systemCluster analysisScheduling (production processes)Software bugEnergy consumptionCluster (spacecraft)Computer architectureParallel computingSoftwareOperating systemProgramming languageEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bug-free first silicon is not guaranteed by the existing pre-silicon verification techniques. To have impeccable products, it is now required to identify any bug as soon as the first silicon becomes available. We consider the Assertion Based Verification techniques for the post-silicon debugging based on the insertion of hardware checkers in the debug infrastructure for complex systems on chip. This paper proposes a method to cluster hardware-assertion checkers using the graph partitioning approach. It turns out that having the clusters of hardware-assertions and controlling each cluster selectively during the debug mode and normal operation of the circuit makes integration of assertions inside the circuits easier, and causes lower energy consumption and efficient debug scheduling.

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 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 score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207