2013 8th International Conference on Design &Amp; Technology of Integrated Systems in Nanoscale Era (DTIS) 2013
DOI: 10.1109/dtis.2013.6527772
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical modelling of analog circuits for test metrics computation

Abstract: Analog Built-In Test (BIT) techniques should be evaluated at the design stage, before the real production, by estimating the analog test metrics, namely Test Escapes (TE) and Yield Loss (Yd. Due to the lack of comprehensive fault models, these test metrics are estimated under process variations. In this paper, we estimate the joint cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the output parameters of a Circuit Under Test (CUT)from an initial small sample of devices obtained from Monte Carlo circuit simulation. We… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
(20 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…All fault-free circuits that fail the threshold detection test is assumed to be part of P(YL), and all faulty circuits that pass the test is assumed to be part of P(TE). Due to this conservative approach, the test escape that correspond to the best FoM (0.953) at P(TE) = 5•10 -2 is much worse in this study than that of an optimized P(TE) = 9.09•10 -4 from [16] and P(TE) = 1.98•10 -4 from [60]. Due to the CI choice of 0.9, the yield loss that correspond to the best FoM in this study is high at P(YL) = 1.89•10 -2 compared to that of P(YL)= 9.1•10 -3 from [16] and P(YL) = 1.98• 10 -4 from [60].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All fault-free circuits that fail the threshold detection test is assumed to be part of P(YL), and all faulty circuits that pass the test is assumed to be part of P(TE). Due to this conservative approach, the test escape that correspond to the best FoM (0.953) at P(TE) = 5•10 -2 is much worse in this study than that of an optimized P(TE) = 9.09•10 -4 from [16] and P(TE) = 1.98•10 -4 from [60]. Due to the CI choice of 0.9, the yield loss that correspond to the best FoM in this study is high at P(YL) = 1.89•10 -2 compared to that of P(YL)= 9.1•10 -3 from [16] and P(YL) = 1.98• 10 -4 from [60].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…In literature on specification-driven testing, probability of test escape P(TE) and yield loss P(YL) are used as a measure for determining the efficacy of a test under investigation [13], [60]. P(YL) is defined as functional CUTs that fail the test despite meeting the required performance specification, where P(TE) is defined as circuits not meeting specification that pass the tests.…”
Section: Figure Of Merit Calculationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Section 4 will describe A Tool for Analog/RF BIST Evaluation Using Statistical Models 31:3 these density estimation techniques. From the CDF, it is possible to estimate the test metrics using a direct calculation [Beznia et al 2013b] or via the generation of a larger sample of circuit instances by sampling the CDF model [Bounceur et al 2006]. It must also be noted that an analysis of the CDF model may result in the identification of output parameters that are redundant or that do not contribute to the actual test metrics results.…”
Section: Methodological Flow For Model Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the same purpose, some approaches have introduced the specification test compaction as described in [23] and [24] that leverages the correlation among specification tests in order to perform only a few of these tests during production and predict the values of the omitted ones to reduce test cost as well as the use of BIST techniques [25]. On the other hand, several methods based on the evaluation of test metrics are proposed in [26] and [27]. Most of them are based on the estimation of the distribution of the output parameters using a small sample of circuits generated via Monte Carlo simulation.…”
Section: Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%