DocumentCode :
2743491
Title :
Formal verification meets robustness checking — Techniques and challenges
Author :
Drechsler, Rolf ; Fey, Görschwin
Author_Institution :
Inst. of Comput. Sci., Univ. of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
fYear :
2010
fDate :
14-16 April 2010
Firstpage :
4
Lastpage :
4
Abstract :
Summary form only given. Modern circuits contain up to several hundred million transistors and this number grows exponentially over time. Thus, the state-of-the-art design flows have to be improved continuously. In the meantime ensuring correctness becomes a major bottleneck. Up to 80% of the overall design costs are due to verification and even more problems are foreseeable - shrinking feature sizes lead to large process variations, increased susceptibility to radiation, etc. As a result even a correct design may contain faulty components. Thus, robustness is required, i.e. correct operation in presence of faults. Formal verification techniques have gained large attention, since they allow proving the correctness of a circuit and thereby ensure 100% functional correctness. Moreover, the underlying techniques can also be used to prove robustness of a design. Besides being more reliable, formal verification approaches have also shown to be more cost effective in many cases, since test bench creation - usually a very time consuming and error prone task - becomes superfluous. Therefore these techniques allow unveiling faulty behaviour automatically. Proving robustness in the sense of fault tolerance is important. As in any implementation step, faults may tamper the behaviour. In particular, fault tolerance may hide flaws during the standard verification step. Therefore instead of relying on the design´s architectural precautions against faults, the implementation has to be proven to be fault tolerant. In this tutorial, after a brief motivation of the overall topic and definition of the problem domain, the alternative verification approaches are explained. Next, the application of the underlying formal techniques for robustness checking is considered. The standard approaches for verification are simulation, emulation and formal methods. Details are discussed related to formal verification, symbolic simulation and assertion based verification. The verification scenarios- - for equivalence checking (EC) and property checking (PC) are presented and the underlying proof techniques are explained. Robustness checking then also builds on the underlying formal methods. This allows analyzing the robustness of a design fully automatically. Practical scenarios covered by this model for robustness of a circuit are discussed. The model not only yields a measure for the robustness of a circuit but also shows critical parts of the implementation that should be reengineered. In comparison alternative approaches, e.g. using statistical measures, are outlined. Further references are given for all topics are given (see below). Directions for future work and research challenges are discussed.
Keywords :
fault tolerance; network synthesis; assertion based verification; equivalence checking; fault tolerance; formal verification technique; property checking; robustness checking techniques; symbolic simulation; transistors; Automatic testing; Circuit faults; Circuit testing; Computer science; Design automation; Fault tolerance; Formal verification; Logic testing; Robustness; Transistors;
fLanguage :
English
Publisher :
ieee
Conference_Titel :
Design and Diagnostics of Electronic Circuits and Systems (DDECS), 2010 IEEE 13th International Symposium on
Conference_Location :
Vienna
Print_ISBN :
978-1-4244-6612-2
Type :
conf
DOI :
10.1109/DDECS.2010.5491833
Filename :
5491833
Link To Document :
بازگشت