A Structural Method for Output Compaction of Sequential Automata Implemented as Circuits

  • M. Seuring
  • M. Gössel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2214)


In this paper output space compaction for sequential circuits is considered for the first time. Based on simple estimates for the probabilities of the existence of sensitized paths from the signal lines to the circuit outputs, optimal output partitions can be determined without fault simulation. The outputs are partitioned in such a way that internal stuck-at faults influence at most one of the outputs of a group with high probability. The proposed method is primarily developed for concurrent checking. On average with less than 4 compacted groups of outputs an error detection probability of 98% can be achieved. As the experimental results show, the method is also effectively applicable in pseudo-random test mode. On average for three groups of compacted outputs there is no reduction of the fault coverage for a pseudo-random off-line test. Since the proposed algorithm is of linear complexity with respect to the number of circuit lines and of quadratic complexity with respect to the number of primary circuit outputs large automata can be efficiently processed.


Signal Line Fault Coverage Fault Simulation Primary Output Circuit Output 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    M. Abramovici, M. A. Breuer, A. D. Friedman, “Digital Systems Testing and Testable Design,” IEEE Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Bohlau, “Zero Aliasing Compression Based on Groups of Weakly Independent Outputs in Circuits with High Complexity for Two Fault Models,” in Lect. Notes in Comp. Science, vol. 852, pp. 289–306, 1994, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Chakrabarty and J. P. Hayes, “Test Response Compaction Using Multiplexed Parity Trees,” in IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design, vol. 15, pp. 1399–1408, Nov. 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Chakrabarty and J. P. Hayes, “Zero-Aliasing Space Compaction of test Responses Using Multiple Parity Signatures,” in IEEE Trans. VLSI Systems, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 309–313, Nov. 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. Chakrabarty, B. T. Murray, J. P. Hayes, “Optimal Space Compaction of Test Responses,” in Proc. Int. Test Conf., pp. 834–843, 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Gossel and E. S. Sogomonyan, “Design of Self-Testing and On-Line Fault Detection Combinational Circuits with Weakly Independent Outputs,” in J. Electronic testing: Theory and Applications, vol. 4, pp. 267–281, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Ivanov, B. K. Tsuji, Y. Zorian, “Programmable BIST Space Compactors,” in IEEE Trans. Computers, vol. 45, pp. 1393–1404, Dec. 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Savir, “Shrinking Wide Compressors,” in IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design, vol. 14, pp. 1379–1387, Nov. 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Seuring, M. Gossel, E. Sogomonyan, “A Structural Approach for Space Compaction for Concurrent Checking and BIST,” in IEEE VLSI Test Symp., pp. 354–361, April 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. S. Sogomonyan, “Design of Built-in Self-Checking Monitoring Circuits for Combinational Devices,” in Automation and Remote Control, vol. 35(2), pp. 280–289, 1974.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Seuring
    • 1
  • M. Gössel
    • 1
  1. 1.Fault Tolerant Computing GroupUniversity of Potsdam, Institute of Computer SciencePotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations