Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
In general, we do not know which fault model can explain the cause of the faulty values at the primary outputs in a circuit under test before starting diagnosis. Moreover, under Built-In Self Test (BIST) environment, it is difficult to know which primary output has a faulty value on the application of a failing test pattern. In this paper, we propose an effective diagnosis method on multiple fault models, based on only pass/fail information on the applied test patterns. The proposed method deduces both the fault model and the fault location based on the number of detections for the single stuck-at fault at each line, by performing single stuck-at fault simulation with both passing and failing test patterns. To improve the ability of fault diagnosis, our method uses the logic values of lines and the condition whether the stuck-at faults at the lines are detected or not by passing and failing test patterns. Experimental results show that our method can accurately identify the fault models (stuck-at fault model, AND/OR bridging fault model, dominance bridging fault model, or open fault model) for 90% faulty circuits and that the faulty sites are located within two candidate faults. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2008 | 10.1093/ietisy/e91-d.3.675 | IEICE Transactions |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
multiple fault model,fault diagnosis,single stuck-at fault,stuck-at fault,single stuck-at fault simulation,fault location,open fault model,multiple fault models,fault model,fail information,candidate fault,test pattern,pass,combinational circuits,combinational circuit,diagnosis | Fault coverage,Computer science,Real-time computing,Artificial intelligence,Fault model,Built-in self-test,Stuck-at fault,Automatic test pattern generation,Pattern recognition,Bridging fault,Algorithm,Fault (power engineering),Fault indicator | Journal |
Volume | Issue | ISSN |
E91-D | 3 | 1745-1361 |
Citations | PageRank | References |
1 | 0.36 | 6 |
Authors | ||
5 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yuzo Takamatsu | 1 | 150 | 27.40 |
| Hiroshi Takahashi | 2 | 148 | 24.32 |
| Yoshinobu Higami | 3 | 140 | 27.24 |
| Takashi Aikyo | 4 | 93 | 11.46 |
| Koji Yamazaki | 5 | 27 | 8.41 |