Should nanometer circuits be periodically tested in the field?

A. Singh
{"title":"Should nanometer circuits be periodically tested in the field?","authors":"A. Singh","doi":"10.1109/TEST.2003.1271120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Escapes from manufacturing test: A large system built out of well-tested components can still have a significant probability of failure due to test escapes. Unfortunately field testing is unlikely to detect such failures because manufacturing tests, carried out on individual parts and on assembled (sub)systems, are far more comprehensive. Indeed, any proposed field test can be applied as part of manufacturing tests, but reapplying all manufacturing tests is generally not possible in the field. Thus it is unrealistic to expect a significant number of manufacturing test escapes to be picked up by subsequent field-testing, unless the defects “grow” in the field and cause additional malfunction. Concurrent test methods, such as self checking, on the other hand, can be effective here since they can detect errors for input conditions not observed during test.","PeriodicalId":236182,"journal":{"name":"International Test Conference, 2003. Proceedings. ITC 2003.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Test Conference, 2003. Proceedings. ITC 2003.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/TEST.2003.1271120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Escapes from manufacturing test: A large system built out of well-tested components can still have a significant probability of failure due to test escapes. Unfortunately field testing is unlikely to detect such failures because manufacturing tests, carried out on individual parts and on assembled (sub)systems, are far more comprehensive. Indeed, any proposed field test can be applied as part of manufacturing tests, but reapplying all manufacturing tests is generally not possible in the field. Thus it is unrealistic to expect a significant number of manufacturing test escapes to be picked up by subsequent field-testing, unless the defects “grow” in the field and cause additional malfunction. Concurrent test methods, such as self checking, on the other hand, can be effective here since they can detect errors for input conditions not observed during test.
纳米电路应该定期在现场测试吗?
制造测试的逃逸:由经过良好测试的组件构建的大型系统仍然可能由于测试逃逸而导致失败。不幸的是,现场测试不太可能发现此类故障,因为在单个部件和组装(子)系统上进行的制造测试要全面得多。实际上,任何拟议的现场试验都可以作为生产试验的一部分加以应用,但在现场一般不可能重新应用所有生产试验。因此,期望大量的制造测试逃逸被随后的现场测试所发现是不现实的,除非缺陷在现场“生长”并导致额外的故障。另一方面,并发测试方法(如自检)在这里是有效的,因为它们可以检测在测试期间未观察到的输入条件的错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信