EDAToolsCafe
   >> EDA User News and Reviews
Thread views: 59356 View all threadsNext thread*

Gerry
(Unregistered)
04/05/06 09:36 AM
Gerry Report this article as Inappropriate to us !!!Login to Reply

I was hoping for a clear definition of the term "Verification" At www.ictooling.com I focus on Physical Verification, this article is not quite right. It is essential that the Physical Veritfication (DRC) be 100% correct(DRC, LVS, device extraction) When digital verification (simulation) requires that test vectors be suppled to stimulate the device, then the concept of 100% verification becomes difficult as the input vector space becomes large. In analog verification (simulation) the issues of process variation adds another variation that makes 100% coverage difficult. In Physical Verification, the DRC deck is assigned a gold standard and 100% coverage is usually required (exceptions for Memorys and special cases do exist) This area is also getting to be problematic as DFM and YIELD requirements have added "recommended rules" that do not always require 100 coverage.


Entire thread
SubjectPosted byPosted on
*Optimal Verification  04/04/06 09:32 AM
.*Re: Optimal Verification KathyLester   04/10/20 07:20 AM
.*Re: Optimal Verification Barclalone   03/26/20 09:54 AM
.*Does 100% compliance o DRC mean what people think it means?Dave Doman  04/06/06 12:25 PM
.*GerryGerry  04/05/06 09:36 AM
.*Design for VerificationBharat  04/04/06 09:56 AM
.*Appropriate VerificationDave Doman  04/04/06 09:32 AM
Jump to

 

TrueCircuits:



© 2020 Internet Business Systems, Inc.
670 Aberdeen Way, Milpitas, CA 95035
+1 (408) 882-6554 — Contact Us, or visit our other sites:
AECCafe - Architectural Design and Engineering TechJobsCafe - Technical Jobs and Resumes GISCafe - Geographical Information Services  MCADCafe - Mechanical Design and Engineering ShareCG - Share Computer Graphic (CG) Animation, 3D Art and 3D Models
  Privacy PolicyAdvertise