MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238823988 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14652159.v1

Study of single event upsets (SEUS) a survey and analysis

2021· preprint· en· W4238823988 on OpenAlexaff
Sheldon Mark Foulds

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriple modular redundancySoft errorField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceHamming codeSingle event upsetRedundancy (engineering)Error detection and correctionCoding (social sciences)Reliability engineeringEmbedded systemModular designComputer hardwareDecoding methodsEngineeringAlgorithmElectronic engineeringStatic random-access memoryMathematicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last few years evolution in electronics technology has led to the shrinkage of electronic circuits. While this has led to the emergence of more powerful computing systems it has also caused a dramatic increase in the occurrence of soft errors and a steady climb in failure in time (FIT) rates. This problem is most prevalent in FPGA based systems which are highly susceptible to radiation induced errors. Depending upon the severity of the problem a number of methods exist to counter these effects including Triple Modular Redundancy (TMR), Error Control Coding (ECC), scrubbing systems etc. The following project presents a simulation of an FPGA based system that employs one of the popular error control code techniques called the Hamming Code. A resulting analysis shows that Hamming Code is able to mitigate the effects of single event upsets (SEUs) but suffers due to a number of limitations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207