Abstract The representation of timing, a key element in modeling hardware behavior, is realized in hardware description languages including ADLIB-SABLE, Verilog, and VHDL, through delay constructs. The use of delays in the literature may be organized into four classes. Under the first category, the mean values are utilized as precise delay elements in the simulators. VHDL adopts this view to characterize transport delays, where a single value is utilized, rise and fall delays, and inertial delays. In describing the lifetime of a state, also termed time advance function, DEVS proposes to use precise delay elements. Under the second category, termed min–max delay, a delay is represented through an interval, implying that the value of the delay is not known precisely and that any of the values in the interval represents a possible value for the actual delay. In the third category, a delay is expressed in the form of a stochastic distribution. The use of fuzzy models of delays constitutes the fourth category. In the real world, however, precise values for delays are very difficult, if not impossible, to obtain with certainty. The reasons include variations in the manufacturing process, temperature, voltage, and other environmental parameters. Consequently, simulations that employ precise delay values are susceptible to inaccurate results. This paper proposes an extension to the classical DEVS by introducing min–max delays for use in both internal and external transition functions. In the augmented formalism, termed Min–Max-DEVS, the state of a hardware model may, in some time interval, become unknown and is represented by the symbol, ϕ . The occurrence of ϕ implies greater accuracy of the results, not lack of information. Min–Max-DEVS offers a unique advantage, namely, the execution of a single simulation pass utilizing min–max delays is equivalent to multiple simulation passes, each corresponding to a set of precise delay values selected from the interval. This, in turn, poses a key challenge – efficient execution of the Min–Max-DEVS simulator.
[1]
Bernard P. Zeigler,et al.
Abstracting event-based control models for high autonomy systems
,
1993,
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..
[2]
Rajeev Alur,et al.
A Theory of Timed Automata
,
1994,
Theor. Comput. Sci..
[3]
Melvin A. Breuer,et al.
Digital systems testing and testable design
,
1990
.
[4]
Bernard P. Zeigler,et al.
Theory of modeling and simulation
,
1976
.
[5]
Arthur D. Friedman,et al.
Logical design of digital systems
,
1975
.
[6]
Melvin A. Breuer,et al.
Diagnosis and Reliable Design of Digital Systems
,
1977
.
[7]
Frédéric Châne,et al.
Simulation and verification II: from timed automata to DEVS models
,
2003,
WSC '03.
[8]
Norbert Giambiasi,et al.
SILOG: A Practical Tool for Large Digital Network Simulation
,
1979,
16th Design Automation Conference.
[9]
Didier Dubois,et al.
Processing fuzzy temporal knowledge
,
1989,
IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..
[10]
Sumit Ghosh,et al.
A Preemtive Scheduling Mechanism for Accurate Behavioral Simulation of Digital Designs
,
1989,
IEEE Trans. Computers.
[11]
Herbert Praehofer,et al.
SYSTEM THEORETIC FORMALISMS FOR COMBINED DISCRETE-CONTINUOUS SYSTEM SIMULATION
,
1991
.
[12]
Sumit Ghosh,et al.
On the nature and inadequacies of transport timing delay constructs in VHDL descriptions
,
1996,
Proceedings International Conference on Computer Design. VLSI in Computers and Processors.
[13]
Zainalabedin Navabi,et al.
VHDL: Analysis and Modeling of Digital Systems
,
1992
.