6.2ARApr 17
Pecker: Bug Localization Framework for Sequential Designs via Causal Chain ReconstructionJiaping Tang, Jianan Mu, Tianyun Ma et al.
Debugging represents a time-consuming and labor-intensive task in hardware design, with bug localization constituting a substantial portion of this process. While spectrum-based bug localization techniques have achieved remarkable success in software domains and shown promise for hardware description languages, their effectiveness severely degrades in sequential designs. Unlike software programs, hardware designs exhibit intrinsic temporal characteristics that create fundamental challenges: timing misalignment between bug activation and observation, and progressive error propagation through state elements that obscures the root cause. To address these limitations, we propose Pecker, a novel bug localization framework that reconstructs the broken causal chain in sequential designs. Our approach introduces two key innovations: temporal backtracking using Estimated Minimal Propagation Cycles to identify potential activation cycles, strategic trace pruning to eliminate state pollution effects. We evaluate Pecker on comprehensive benchmarks comprising both combinational and sequential circuits. Experimental results demonstrate that Pecker effectively localizes 51%/80%/85% bugs within Top-1/3/5 ranks respectively, significantly outperforming state-of-the-art techniques. Notably, Pecker maintains robust performance across circuit complexities while existing methods exhibit severe degradation on sequential designs.
4.1LGNov 28, 2025
ParaGate: Parasitic-Driven Domain Adaptation Transfer Learning for Netlist Performance PredictionBin Sun, Jingyi Zhou, Jianan Mu et al.
In traditional EDA flows, layout-level performance metrics are only obtainable after placement and routing, hindering global optimization at earlier stages. Although some neural-network-based solutions predict layout-level performance directly from netlists, they often face generalization challenges due to the black-box heuristics of commercial placement-and-routing tools, which create disparate data across designs. To this end, we propose ParaGate, a three-step cross-stage prediction framework that infers layout-level timing and power from netlists. First, we propose a two-phase transfer-learning approach to predict parasitic parameters, pre-training on mid-scale circuits and fine-tuning on larger ones to capture extreme conditions. Next, we rely on EDA tools for timing analysis, offloading the long-path numerical reasoning. Finally, ParaGate performs global calibration using subgraph features. Experiments show that ParaGate achieves strong generalization with minimal fine-tuning data: on openE906, its arrival-time R2 from 0.119 to 0.897. These results demonstrate that ParaGate could provide guidance for global optimization in the synthesis and placement stages.
1.2ARNov 25, 2025
InF-ATPG: Intelligent FFR-Driven ATPG with Advanced Circuit Representation Guided Reinforcement LearningBin Sun, Rengang Zhang, Zhiteng Chao et al.
Automatic test pattern generation (ATPG) is a crucial process in integrated circuit (IC) design and testing, responsible for efficiently generating test patterns. As semiconductor technology progresses, traditional ATPG struggles with long execution times to achieve the expected fault coverage, which impacts the time-to-market of chips. Recent machine learning techniques, like reinforcement learning (RL) and graph neural networks (GNNs), show promise but face issues such as reward delay in RL models and inadequate circuit representation in GNN-based methods. In this paper, we propose InF-ATPG, an intelligent FFR-driven ATPG framework that overcomes these challenges by using advanced circuit representation to guide RL. By partitioning circuits into fanout-free regions (FFRs) and incorporating ATPG-specific features into a novel QGNN architecture, InF-ATPG enhances test pattern generation efficiency. Experimental results show InF-ATPG reduces backtracks by 55.06\% on average compared to traditional methods and 38.31\% compared to the machine learning approach, while also improving fault coverage.