Cellular Array-Based Delay-Insensitive Asynchronous Circuits Design and Test for Nanocomputing Systems
Complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS)has been the dominant technology for implementing VLSI systems because it provides a good trade-off high speed and small area.The continuous decrease in transistor feature size has been pushing the CMOS process to its physical limits caused by ultra-thin gate oxides,short channel effects, doping fluctuations, and the unavailability of lithography in nanoscale range. To continue the size/speed improvement trends according to Moore's Law, nanoelectronic and molecular electronic devices are needed. A significant amount of research has been done in nanoscale computing system design [1–5].Although recent research have resulted in the development of basic logic elements and simple circuits in nanoscale,there are still debates on what logic style and architecture will be the best for nanocomputers. A family of asynchronous logic called delay-insensitive circuits has drawn attention in recent years. The advantages of delay-insensitive circuits include flexible timing requirement,low power, high modularity, etc. These characteristics fit the needs of nanoscale computing. Cellular arrays have an ideal architecture for implementing delay-insensitive circuits in nanoscale; they have highly regular structures,simple cell behavior,and flexible scalability [5,6]. The regular structure together with delay-insensitive circuit style makes cellular arrays a viable option for implementing nanocomputing systems.
KeywordsMuller Cell Cellular Array Faulty Signal Asynchronous Logic Muller Form
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.K. Morita, M. Margenstern, and K. Imai, “Universality of Reversible Hexagonal Cellular Automata,” MFCS’98 Satellite Workshop on Frontiers Between Decidability and Undecidability, Aug. 24-25, 1998Google Scholar
- 3.S. Adachi, F. Peper, and J. Lee, “Computation by Asynchronously Updating Cellular Automata,” Journal of Statistical Physics, Vol. 114, Nos. 1-2, Jan. 2004Google Scholar
- 4.J. Lee, F. Peper, S. Adachi, K. Morita, and S. Mashiko, “Reversible Computation in Asynchronous Cellular Automata,” Unconventional Models of Computation (2002), LNCS 2509, pp. 220-229Google Scholar
- 7.P. K. Lala, Self-checking and Fault-tolerant Digital Design, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 2001Google Scholar
- 9.M. Renaudin and B. El Hassan, “The design of fast asynchronous adder structures and their implementation using DCVS logic,” 1994 IEEE International Symposium on circuits and systems, Vol. 4, 291-294, 1994Google Scholar
- 10.W. Kuang, “Iterative Ring and Power-Aware Design Techniques for Self-Timed Digital Circuits,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Central Florida, July 2003Google Scholar
- 11.J. Di, J. S. Yuan, and M. Hagedorn, “Energy-aware Multiplier Design in Multirail Encoding Logic,” IEEE 45th Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Aug. 2002Google Scholar
- 12.P. Patra and D. S. Fussell, “Building-blocks for designing DI circuits,” Technical report TR93-23, Dept. of Computer Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Nov. 1993Google Scholar
- 13.P. K. Lala, Digital Circuit Testing and Testability, Academic Press, New York, 1997Google Scholar
- 14.J. Di, P. K. Lala, and D. Vasudevan, “On the Effect of Stuck-at Faults on DelayInsensitive Nanoscale Circuits,” Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI Systems Symposium 2005 (DFT 2005), Oct. 2005Google Scholar