MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SEU Reliability Assessment Framework for COTS Many-core Processors

2022· article· en· W4313886527 on OpenAlexaff
C. Dammak, Otmane Aı̈t Mohamed, Mounir Boukadoum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault injectionComputer scienceScalabilityMulti-core processorMicroarchitectureEmbedded systemCore (optical fiber)Reliability (semiconductor)Fault toleranceSoft errorReliability engineeringParallel computingDistributed computingOperating systemEngineeringSoftwarePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high level of performance intrinsic to many-core architectures has made them the obvious successor to single-core processors in scenarios that require high computation. However, the increase in compute units also magnifies the vulnerability to soft errors, which may lead to system failure. This work proposes a portable and scalable fault injection engine for open-source many-core processor architectures. The tool performs automated simulation-based fault injection campaigns on the RTL design to provide insight into the impact of soft errors on each processor core and to evaluate their propagation across cores. This platform was validated on the OpenPiton open-source many-core processor, with a reliability assessment performed to evaluate SEU impact on the targeted architecture. This study was made on a 2-core and a 3-core system with 6 classes of faults, but the approach is scalable to more cores and can be easily extended to cover more fault injection targets. Our results show that 38.5% and 51.1% of the injected faults have led to an erroneous output result of the target core and 13.7% and 2.5% to a system crash for 2-core and 3-core systems, respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207