A comparison of stuck-at fault coverage and I/sub DDQ/ testing on defect levels
- 30 December 2002
- proceedings article
- Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
- p. 293-299
- https://doi.org/10.1109/test.1993.470684
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- STUCK FAULT AND CURRENT TESTING COMPARISON USING CMOS CHIP TESTPublished by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2005
- THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TEST SETS ON QUALITY LEVEL PREDICTION: WHEN IS 80% BETTER THAN 90%?Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2005
- Carafe: an inductive fault analysis tool for CMOS VLSI circuitsPublished by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2002
- Fault coverage and yield predictions: do we need more than 100% coverage?Published by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2002
- Testing for parametric faults in static CMOS circuitsPublished by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2002
- I DDQ testing in CMOS digital ASICsJournal of Electronic Testing, 1992
- Reliability defect detection and screening during processing-theory and implementationPublished by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,1992
- Fault coverage requirement in production testing of LSI circuitsIEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 1982
- Defect Level as a Function of Fault CoverageIEEE Transactions on Computers, 1981