Feature Selection for Cost Reduction In MCU Performance Screening

In safety-critical applications, microcontrollers must satisfy strict quality constraints and performances in terms of $F_{\max}$, that is, the maximum operating frequency. It has been demonstrated that data extracted from on-chip ring oscillators, the so-called speed monitors, can model the $F_{\max}$ of integrated circuits using machine learning models. Those models are suitable for the performance screening process, and they use speed monitors are features, while the target is the Fmax. But if the number of features used for building a machine learning model is huge, the risk of over-fitting or curse of dimensionality is high, leading to a high generalization error. Also, devices with a high number of ring-oscillator are costly to be produced. This paper copes with supervised feature selection in microcontroller performance screening during the early phase of prototyping and presents methodologies to reduce the number of monitors needed to build efficient machine learning models without losing in accuracy. We propose a methodology to rank features according to their importance in the performance prediction, able to extract a subset of them drastically reduced in size, but still able to well solve the underlying task. Experiments showed that the chosen subset of features leads to simpler ML models that can achieve lower prediction error, reducing overfitting. This permits avoiding inserting the full set of sensors in the final product, with a huge saving of money and physical space in the silicon.

[1]  Giovanni Squillero,et al.  Microcontroller Performance Screening: Optimizing the Characterization in the Presence of Anomalous and Noisy Data , 2022, 2022 IEEE 28th International Symposium on On-Line Testing and Robust System Design (IOLTS).

[2]  Martin Huch,et al.  A Scalable Design Flow for Performance Monitors Using Functional Path Ring Oscillators , 2021, 2021 IEEE International Test Conference (ITC).

[3]  Matthijs J. Warrens,et al.  The coefficient of determination R-squared is more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression analysis evaluation , 2021, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[4]  Giovanni Squillero,et al.  Exploiting Active Learning for Microcontroller Performance Prediction , 2021, 2021 IEEE European Test Symposium (ETS).

[5]  S. Asai VLSI Design and Test for Systems Dependability , 2021 .

[6]  Ulf Schlichtmann,et al.  Machine Learning based Performance Prediction of Microcontrollers using Speed Monitors , 2020, 2020 IEEE International Test Conference (ITC).

[7]  Tohari Ahmad,et al.  Feature Importance Ranking for Increasing Performance of Intrusion Detection System , 2020, 2020 3rd International Conference on Computer and Informatics Engineering (IC2IE).

[8]  Dimitrios Soudris,et al.  In-the-Field Mitigation of Process Variability for Improved FPGA Performance , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[9]  Bishnu Prasad Das,et al.  Low Overhead Warning Flip-Flop Based on Charge Sharing for Timing Slack Monitoring , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems.

[10]  Jorge Cadima,et al.  Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[11]  Mark Tehranipoor,et al.  SoC Speed Binning Using Machine Learning and On-Chip Slack Sensors , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[12]  T. Chai,et al.  Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? – Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature , 2014 .

[13]  Florence Azaïs,et al.  Making predictive analog/RF alternate test strategy independent of training set size , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Test Conference.

[14]  Puneet Gupta,et al.  DDRO: A novel performance monitoring methodology based on design-dependent ring oscillators , 2012, Thirteenth International Symposium on Quality Electronic Design (ISQED).

[15]  Jeff Rearick,et al.  Selecting the most relevant structural Fmax for system Fmax correlation , 2010, 2010 28th VLSI Test Symposium (VTS).

[16]  Jing Zeng,et al.  Data learning techniques and methodology for Fmax prediction , 2009, 2009 International Test Conference.

[17]  Srikanth Venkataraman,et al.  Automated Debug of Speed Path Failures Using Functional Tests , 2009, 2009 27th IEEE VLSI Test Symposium.

[18]  David Blaauw,et al.  Razor II: In Situ Error Detection and Correction for PVT and SER Tolerance , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Solid-State Circuits Conference - Digest of Technical Papers.

[19]  Yiorgos Makris,et al.  Error Moderation in Low-Cost Machine-Learning-Based Analog/RF Testing , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems.

[20]  T. Schulz,et al.  An Effective Switching Current Methodology to Predict the Performance of Complex Digital Circuits , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting.

[21]  Abhijit Chatterjee,et al.  Prediction of analog performance parameters using fast transienttesting , 2002, IEEE Trans. Comput. Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst..

[22]  Jay B. Brockman,et al.  Predictive subset testing: optimizing IC parametric performance testing for quality, cost, and yield , 1989 .

[23]  Chia-Ling Chang,et al.  Accurate performance evaluation of VLSI designs with selected CMOS process parameters , 2018, IET Circuits Devices Syst..

[24]  Robert Cedergren,et al.  Guided tour , 1990, Nature.