|
|
1 | (10) |
|
Part I Preliminaries and Previous Work |
|
|
|
|
11 | (30) |
|
|
11 | (3) |
|
|
14 | (2) |
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
|
16 | (9) |
|
|
17 | (3) |
|
|
20 | (5) |
|
2.4 Classical ATPG Algorithms |
|
|
25 | (11) |
|
2.4.1 ATPG for Stuck-at Faults |
|
|
25 | (7) |
|
2.4.2 ATPG for Delay Faults |
|
|
32 | (4) |
|
2.5 Industrial Test Environment |
|
|
36 | (5) |
|
|
41 | (18) |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
|
42 | (2) |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
3.3 Advanced SAT Techniques |
|
|
44 | (8) |
|
3.3.1 Fast Boolean Constraint Propagation |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
46 | (3) |
|
3.3.3 Conflict-Driven Heuristics |
|
|
49 | (2) |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
52 | (1) |
|
3.4 Circuit-to-CNF Transformation |
|
|
52 | (2) |
|
3.5 Circuit-Oriented SAT and Observability Don't Cares |
|
|
54 | (5) |
|
3.5.1 Exploitation of Observability Don't Cares |
|
|
56 | (3) |
|
4 ATPG Based on Boolean Satisfiability |
|
|
59 | (14) |
|
4.1 SAT-Based ATPG for Boolean Circuits |
|
|
60 | (6) |
|
4.1.1 SAT Formulation: Stuck-at Fault Model |
|
|
60 | (3) |
|
4.1.2 SAT-Based ATPG Techniques |
|
|
63 | (3) |
|
4.2 SAT-Based ATPG for Industrial Circuits |
|
|
66 | (3) |
|
4.2.1 Multiple-Valued Logic |
|
|
66 | (2) |
|
|
68 | (1) |
|
4.2.3 Improving Compactness |
|
|
68 | (1) |
|
4.3 Combination with Structural Algorithm |
|
|
69 | (4) |
|
Part II New SAT Techniques and their Application in ATPG |
|
|
|
5 Dynamic Clause Activation |
|
|
73 | (34) |
|
5.1 Overall Framework for Dynamic Clause Activation |
|
|
74 | (3) |
|
5.2 Efficient Activation Methodology |
|
|
77 | (5) |
|
5.2.1 Consistent SAT Instance |
|
|
78 | (1) |
|
5.2.2 Structural Watch List |
|
|
79 | (3) |
|
5.3 Literal-Based Activation |
|
|
82 | (2) |
|
5.4 Implicit Observability Don't Cares |
|
|
84 | (5) |
|
5.4.1 Clause-Based J-Frontier |
|
|
85 | (3) |
|
5.4.2 SCOAP-Based Decision Heuristic |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
5.5 Classical SAT Solver Emulation |
|
|
89 | (2) |
|
5.6 SAT Formulation for Test Generation Using DCA |
|
|
91 | (3) |
|
5.6.1 Dynamic Clause Activation and Multiple-Valued Logic |
|
|
93 | (1) |
|
|
94 | (11) |
|
5.7.1 Results for the Stuck-at Fault Model |
|
|
95 | (3) |
|
5.7.2 Results for the Path Delay Fault Model |
|
|
98 | (2) |
|
5.7.3 Results for Industrial Circuits |
|
|
100 | (5) |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
6 Circuit-Based Dynamic Learning |
|
|
107 | (20) |
|
6.1 Integration of Dynamic Learning |
|
|
108 | (4) |
|
6.1.1 Pervasive Conflict Clause Identification |
|
|
108 | (2) |
|
6.1.2 Variable-Based Activation |
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
6.1.3 Combination with Dynamic Clause Activation |
|
|
111 | (1) |
|
6.2 Post-Classification Phase |
|
|
112 | (1) |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
6.4 Improved SAT Solving Engine |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
|
115 | (8) |
|
6.5.1 Dynamic Learning for Stuck-at Faults |
|
|
116 | (2) |
|
6.5.2 Dynamic Learning for Path Delay Faults |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
6.5.3 Dynamic Learning for Industrial Circuits |
|
|
119 | (3) |
|
6.5.4 Combination of Structural and SAT-Based Algorithms |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
123 | (4) |
|
Part III High Quality Delay Test Generation |
|
|
|
7 High Quality ATPG for Transition Faults |
|
|
127 | (28) |
|
7.1 Transition Fault Model: SAT Formulation |
|
|
128 | (6) |
|
7.1.1 Iterative Logic Array |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
7.1.2 Injection of Stuck-at Faults |
|
|
129 | (2) |
|
7.1.3 Experimental Results |
|
|
131 | (3) |
|
7.2 Long Propagation Paths |
|
|
134 | (6) |
|
7.2.1 Incremental Instance Generation |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
7.2.3 Experimental Results |
|
|
137 | (3) |
|
|
140 | (12) |
|
7.3.1 Motivational Example |
|
|
140 | (2) |
|
7.3.2 Pseudo-Boolean Optimization |
|
|
142 | (1) |
|
7.3.3 PBO Formulation: Timing-Aware ATPG |
|
|
143 | (6) |
|
7.3.4 Using Structural Information |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
7.3.5 Considering Transition-Dependent Delays |
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
7.3.6 Experimental Results |
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
152 | (3) |
|
|
155 | (26) |
|
|
156 | (2) |
|
8.1.1 Robust Tests in Combinational Circuits |
|
|
157 | (1) |
|
8.1.2 Incremental SAT and Learning |
|
|
157 | (1) |
|
8.1.3 PDF Test Generation Using CSAT |
|
|
158 | (1) |
|
8.2 Non-Robust Test Pattern Generation |
|
|
158 | (2) |
|
8.3 Robust Test Pattern Generation |
|
|
160 | (2) |
|
8.4 SAT Instance Generation Flow |
|
|
162 | (1) |
|
8.5 As-Robust-As-Possible Test Generation |
|
|
163 | (9) |
|
8.5.1 Test Generation for ARAP Tests |
|
|
166 | (2) |
|
8.5.2 Incremental SAT Formulation for Static Value Justification |
|
|
168 | (2) |
|
8.5.3 Considering the Presence of Small Delay Defects |
|
|
170 | (2) |
|
|
172 | (7) |
|
8.6.1 Comparison with Competitive Approach |
|
|
173 | (1) |
|
8.6.2 SAT Instance Generation Flow |
|
|
173 | (2) |
|
8.6.3 MONSOON Using DynamicSAT |
|
|
175 | (2) |
|
8.6.4 ARAP Test Generation |
|
|
177 | (2) |
|
|
179 | (2) |
|
|
181 | (2) |
References |
|
183 | (8) |
Index |
|
191 | |