ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Multiple-detect ATPG based on physical neighborhoods
Full text PdfPdf (547 KB)
Source Annual ACM IEEE Design Automation Conference archive
Proceedings of the 43rd annual Design Automation Conference table of contents
San Francisco, CA, USA
SESSION: Session 61: test response compaction and ATPG table of contents
Pages: 1099 - 1102  
Year of Publication: 2006
ISBN:1-59593-381-6
Authors
J. E. Nelson  Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
J. G. Brown  Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
R. Desineni  Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
R. D. Blanton  Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
Sponsors
SIGDA: ACM Special Interest Group on Design Automation
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 4,   Downloads (12 Months): 19,   Citation Count: 3
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1146909.1147186
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Multiple-detect test sets detect single stuck line faults multiple times, and thus have a higher probability of detecting complex defects. But current definitions of what constitutes a new test for a single stuck line fault do not leverage defect locality. Recent work has proposed a new metric to capture quality of a multiple-detect test set based on the number of unique states on lines in the physical neighborhood of a targeted line. This paper presents a new ATPG strategy that uses this metric to generate higher quality multiple-detect test sets.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
R. D. Blanton, "Methods for Characterizing, Generating Test Sequences for, and Simulating Integrated Circuit Faults Using Fault Tuples and Related Systems and Computer Program Products," Dec. 2004, U. S. Patent no. 6, 836, 856.
 
2
B. Keller, "Hierarchical Pattern Faults for Describing Logic Circuit Failure Mechanisms," 1994, U. S. Patent no. 5, 546, 408.
 
3
 
4
A. Jain, "Arbitrary Defects;Modeling and Applications," Master's Thesis, Rutgers Univ., 1999.
 
5
R. D. Blanton, et al., "Analyzing the Effectiveness of Multiple-Detect Test Sets," ITC, pp. 876 --885, 2003.
 
6
 
7
B. Benware, et al., "Impact of Multiple-Detect Test Patterns on Product Quality," ITC, 2003.
 
8
 
9
 
10
I. Pomeranz and S. M. Reddy, "On N-Detection Test Sets and Variable N-Detection Test Sets for Transition Faults," IEEE Trans. on CAD of Integrated Circuits, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 372--383, March 2002.
11
 
12
W. Maly and J. Deszczka, "Yield Estimation Model for VLSI Artwork Evaluation," Electronic Letters, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 226--227, March 1983.
 
13


Collaborative Colleagues:
J. E. Nelson: colleagues
J. G. Brown: colleagues
R. Desineni: colleagues
R. D. Blanton: colleagues