MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230135860 · doi:10.1109/date.2003.1253739

Transistor-level static timing analysis by piecewise quadratic waveform matching

2003· article· en· W4230135860 on OpenAlexaff
Zhong Wang, Jianwen Zhu

Bibliographic record

Venue2003 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLow-power high-performance VLSI design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPiecewiseWaveformMatching (statistics)Static timing analysisQuadratic equationComputer scienceTransistorElectronic engineeringMathematicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringStatisticsVoltageTelecommunicationsEmbedded systemMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While fast timing analysis methods, such as asymptotic waveform evaluation (AWE), have been well established for linear circuits, the timing analysis for non-linear circuits, which are dominant in digital CMOS circuits, is usually, performed by a SPICE like, time domain integration based approach, involving expensive Newton Raphson iterations at numerous time steps. In this paper we propose a new technique that leads to the transient solution of charge/discharge paths with a complexity equivalent to only K DC operating point calculations, where K is the number of transistors along the path. This is accomplished by approximating each nodal voltage as a piecewise quadratic waveform, whose characteristics can be determined by matching the charge/discharge currents. Experiments on a wide range of circuits show that a 31.6 times speed-up over SPICE transient simulation with 10 ps step size can be achieved, while maintaining an average accuracy of 99%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2003 Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and ExhibitionSame topicLow-power high-performance VLSI designFrench-language works237,207