MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238447347 · doi:10.1109/dac.2018.8465835

A Machine Learning Framework to Identify Detailed Routing Short Violations from a Placed Netlist

2018· article· en· W4238447347 on OpenAlexaff
Aysa Fakheri Tabrizi, Logan Rakai, Nima Karimpour Darav, Ismail Bustany, Laleh Behjat, Shuchang Xu, Andrew Kennings

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 55th ACM/ESDA/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMicrosemi (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetlistComputer scienceRouting (electronic design automation)RouterNetwork routingMetricsRouting domainStatic routingMachine learningDistance-vector routing protocolArtificial neural networkRouting protocolDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceComputer networkEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detecting and preventing routing violations has become a critical issue in physical design, especially in the early stages. Lack of correlation between global and detailed routing congestion estimations and the long runtime required to frequently consult a global router adds to the problem. In this paper, we propose a machine learning framework to predict detailed routing short violations from a placed netlist. Factors contributing to routing violations are determined and a supervised neural network model is implemented to detect these violations. Experimental results show that the proposed method is able to predict on average 90% of the shorts with only 7% false alarms and considerably reduced computational time.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 55th ACM/ESDA/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC)Same topicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure AnalysisFrench-language works237,207