Advertisement

Design Methodology: Reliability Evaluation and Optimization

  • Miloš Stanisavljević
  • Alexandre Schmid
  • Yusuf Leblebici
Chapter

Abstract

Nowadays, standard design flows for digital logic design rely on optimization of important parameters such as speed, area, and power. However, even though reliability has been demonstrated as an important parameter that needs to be addressed in the design process, its optimization has not yet found the way into state-of-the-art design approaches.

Keywords

Majority Voter Defect Density Reliability Evaluation NAND Gate Partition Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 6.
    K. Nikolic, A. Sadek, and M. Forshaw, “Fault-tolerant techniques for nanocomputers,” Nanotechnology, vol. 13, pp. 357–362, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 13.
    J. von Neumann, Automata Studies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1956, ch. Probabilistic logic and the synthesis of reliable organisms from unreliable components, pp. 43–98.Google Scholar
  3. 31.
    V. Beiu, W. Ibrahim, and S. Lazarova-Molnar, “A fresh look at majority multiplexing when devices get into the picture,” in Proceedings of the 7th IEEE Conference on Nanotechnology (IEEE-NANO), 2–5 Aug. 2007, pp. 883–888.Google Scholar
  4. 55.
    J. Han and P. Jonker, “A system architecture solution for unreliable nanoelectronic devices,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 201–208, Dec. 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 114.
    S. Spagocci and T. Fountain, “Fault rates in nanochip devices,” Proceedings of the Electrochemical Society, vol. 98, no. 19, 1999, pp. 582–593.Google Scholar
  6. 121.
    S. Roy and V. Beiu, “Multiplexing schemes for cost-effective fault-tolerance,” in Proceedings of the 4th IEEE Conference on Nanotechnology (IEEE-NANO), 16–19 Aug. 2004, pp. 589–592.Google Scholar
  7. 122.
    S. Roy and V. Beiu, “Majority multiplexing-economical redundant fault-tolerant designs for nanoarchitectures,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 441–451, July 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 123.
    A. S. Sadek, K. Nikolic, and M. Forshaw, “Parallel information and computation with restitution for noise-tolerant nanoscale logic networks,” Nanotechnology, vol. 15, pp. 192–210, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 126.
    G. Roelke, R. Baldwin, and D. Bulutoglu, “Analytical models for the performance of von Neumann multiplexing,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 75–89, Jan. 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 141.
    S. Aunet, B. Oelmann, P. A. Norseng, and Y. Berg, “Real-time reconfigurable subthreshold CMOS perceptron,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 645–657, April 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 228.
    S. Aunet and M. Hartman, “Real-time reconfigurable threshold elements and some applications to neural hardware,” in Proceedings of the International Conference Evolvable System (ICES), Trondheim, Norway, Mar. 2003, pp. 365–376.Google Scholar
  12. 229.
    V. Beiu, S. Aunet, R. R. Rydberg III, A. Djupdal, and J. Nyathi, “The vanishing majority gate trading power and speed for reliability,” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Design and Test of Defect-Tolerant Nanoscale Architectures (NANOARCH), 2005, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  13. 247.
    S. Mitra, N. R. Saxena, and E. J. McCluskey, “Common-mode failures in redundant VLSI systems: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 285–295, Sept. 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 249.
    M. C. Hansen, H. Yalcin, and J. P. Hayes, “Unveiling the ISCAS-85 benchmarks: A case study in reverse engineering,” IEEE Design & Test of Computers, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 72–80, July–Sept. 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 250.
    G. Karypis, R. Aggarwal, V. Kumar, and S. Shekhar, “Multilevel hypergraph partitioning: Applications in VLSI domain,” IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 69–79, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 251.
    S. Yang, “Logic synthesis and optimization benchmarks user guide,” Microelectronic Center of North Carolina, Technical Report 1/95, 1991.Google Scholar
  17. 252.
    G. Karypis and V. Kumar, “hMeTiS: A hypergraph partitioning package,” Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Technical Report, 1998.Google Scholar
  18. 253.
    R. Rajaraman and D. F. Wong, “Optimal clustering for delay minimization,” in Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Design Automation (DAC), 14–18 June 1993, pp. 309–314.Google Scholar
  19. 257.
    C. Ababei and K. Bazargan, “Timing minimization by statistical timing hMetis-based partitioning,” in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on VLSI Design, 4–8 Jan. 2003, pp. 58–63.Google Scholar
  20. 258.
    C. M. Fiduccia and R. M. Mattheyses, “A linear-time heuristic for improving network partitions,” in Proceedings of the 19th Design Automation Conference (DAC), 14–16 June 1982, pp. 175–181.Google Scholar
  21. 259.
    S.-L. Ou and M. Pedram, Timing-driven Partitioning Using Iterative Quadratic Programming, 2001, see “Coming Attractions!”. [Online]. Available: http://atrak.usc.edu/ massoud/
  22. 260.
    M. Shih and E. S. Kuh, “Quadratic boolean programming for performance-driven system partitioning,” in Proceedings of the 30th Design Automation Conference (DAC), 14–18 June 1993, pp. 761–765.Google Scholar
  23. 261.
    J. Cong and C. Wu, “Global clustering-based performance-driven circuit partitioning,” in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Physical Design (ISPD), 2002, pp. 149–154.Google Scholar
  24. 263.
    S. Wakabayashi, “An iterative improvement circuit partitioning algorithm under path delay constraints,” IEICE Transactions on Fundamentals of Electronics, Communications and Computer Sciences. Special Section on VLSI Design and CAD Algorithms, vol. 83, no. 12, pp. 2569–2576, 2000.Google Scholar
  25. 264.
    Z. Chishti and T. N. Vijaykumar, “Optimal power/performance pipeline depth for SMT in scaled technologies,” IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 69–81, Jan. 2008.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 265.
    S. Aunet, Y. Berg, and V. Beiu, “Ultra low power redundant logic based on majority-3 gates,” in Proceedings of the IFIP VLSI-SoC, Perth, Australia, Oct. 2005, pp. 553–558.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miloš Stanisavljević
    • 1
  • Alexandre Schmid
    • 1
  • Yusuf Leblebici
    • 1
  1. 1.Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations