Programmable eFuse designs present an integration challenge in modern CMOS processing. The power level to program a fuse, and the programming methodologies leverage reliability mechanisms which all other elements in a design avoid. A high degree of eFuse process control and circuit design is required in order to guarantee operation. Almost all eFuse types are one time programmable and are limited to ‘one chance’ programmable. This tutorial will discuss selected eFuse technologies describing the design philosophy, electrical programming and characterization, the physics of failure, and some of the many applications an on chip programmable element provides.

Click here for a detailed description.

Track 1 Leader: William R. Tonti, PhD

William R. Tonti received the B.S.E.E. with honor (1978) from Northeastern University. He then joined IBM in Essex Junction, Vermont, where he is presently managing a CMOS compact modeling department that develops and deploys the device and RF simulation models in the nodes that span 90nm to32nm. Previously he was the lead device engineer engaged in the32nm development at Albany Nanotech, where he fabricated the first ANT sub 32nm transistor.  He has also held positions at IBM in the capacity of the technical assistant to the VP of process development, and in Engineering and Technology Services, working as AMD’s technologist for the 65nm technology node. He has authored numerous contributed, keynote, and invited papers, and holds over 170 U.S. patents. Dr. Tonti is a member of tau beta pi, eta kappa nu,  a senior member of the IEEE, an advisory board member  of the IEEE Transactions on Device and Material Reliability, a recipient of the 2000 IEEE 3’rd millennium medal (for contributions in semiconductor reliability) , and an ABET engineering curriculum evaluator. Dr. Tonti is a currently a member of the Reliability Society ADCOM., and serves as their 2008 President. Dr. Tonti was recognized as an IBM Master Inventor.

2.1 Mechanical Reliability - 4 hours

Mechanical Reliability analysis is a technique for predicting the expected life and reliability of a mechanical system based on the reliability of the individual mechanical components. Mechanical designs are often one of a kind; therefore historical data from "similar" equipment is not always readily available for predicting performance reliability of the new equipment or its new application. The intent of this tutorial is to guide one through the basic steps of performing a mechanical reliability analysis. However, it is left up to the reliability analyst to select the most applicable techniques to use and which probability function best fits the mechanical equipment that is under evaluation. These techniques may be used to determine reliability improvements based on design changes if the design is not meeting the reliability goals. The most current mechanical reliability model selection guides will be provided. Also, small systems and Micro-mechanical reliability applications will be discussed.

2.2 Thermal Analysis of Electronics - 2 hours

Thermal Analysis of Electronics is a method of determining the Reliability of Electronic Systems in a thermal environment. This is critical since high temperatures degrade reliability. The thermal design discussed in this tutorial identifies and focuses attention on design weaknesses so that they may be corrected, protected against, or accepted after consideration. This tutorial is intended to guide engineers in the thermal design of electronic equipment for improved reliability. It will also help heat transfer experts who are not electronic engineers to provide inputs to the thermal design during the various stages of equipment development. This material allows the tutorial attendee to later use these tutorial notes to evaluate his/her design as it relates to the thermal environment and determine the probability of failure or probability of success. One will be able to evaluate the best method of improving the overall reliability of the system while possibly reducing cost, weight, and size. This tutorial presents the most current techniques for evaluating the thermal characteristics as they relate to the reliability of any part or a complex system.

2.3 Application: Medical Technology and Privacy - 2 hours

This tutorial provides a vision of personalized medicine (PM): Driving the diagnostic to prognostic paradigm shift - strategies for predicting disease through routine health monitoring biomeasurement technologies. What is the incentive - ROI? Health and wellness versus pain and suffering. Some health programs (Kaiser Permanente) restore health and are efficient. For a central database approach, should it be private or public?

What are the current capabilities for the identification and use of biochemical (predictive and diagnostic) and imaging data now for patient care - including molecular pathology, laboratory diagnostics (from clinical chemistry to DNA analysis) and medical diagnostic imaging?

1. Implementation/Integration of Electronic Health Records and Personalized Health Records

2. Standards harmonization, conformance testing, certification

3. Roadmap toward a Nationwide Health Information Network

4. Detailed mathematical modeling and computational analysis

5. Data reduction, filtering, mining for knowledge management, secondary uses, etc

Many of these questions will be answered and the most current medical technologies and security issues will be addressed.

Track 2 Leader: RICHARD L. DOYLE, PE

Mr. Doyle is a Registered Electrical and Civil Engineer in California and has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Oregon State University and a M.S. in Engineering from the University of California, Irvine. Mr. Doyle has more than 30 years of experience in the theoretical analysis and design of electrical and mechanical systems. Mr. Doyle's recent experience includes consulting for the past 20 years in Aerospace, Commercial Electronics, and Nuclear Power Industries. He performed thermal/reliability analysis using computer simulations for different electrical systems including: Digital TV set top boxes, numerous power supplies (a major problem), and Pentium, DSP, and ASIC ICs. Previous consulting work included teaching Thermal Analysis of Electronics to graduate engineers working for the US Navy (Civil Service). This tutorial was taught as a 3 to 5 day seminar and has been presented at many different locations including Washington DC, Louisville, KY, and Port Hueneme, CA. He is a past president of the IEEE Reliability Society and has presented this tutorial numerous times.

The Six Sigma process has been shown effective in identifying and eliminating product defects and eliminating waste, thereby improving process efficiency and product reliability. Design for Six Sigma also goes the next step: to leverage the knowledge gained in resolving the defect to also improve the underlying development process. Hopefully, this proactive step not only improves the present product but keeps the problem from reoccurring in future products. Major companies, like Ford Motor Company, have published tractable savings in excess of 1B USD.

The six sigma processes has been beneficially extended to take the initiative in developing better, designs in the first place, precluding problems rather than having to go back and correct them (six sigma focus). This is the Design-for-Six Sigma (DFSS) initiative. It focuses on getting correct requirements, communicating these effectively across the team, examining and managing the design and environment anomalies, and optimizing the design operating point.  DFSS has been shown to deliver products with as few as 3-4 defects per million opportunities, such as seen on space shuttle software or commercial aircraft flights in the US.

This workshop teaches basic Six Sigma terminology and techniques. DFSS methodology will also be discussed including ten key DFSS processes and tools that can be used to improve the development of systems and software.

Track 3 Leader: Samuel Keene, PhD, FIEEE

Dr. Keene is a Six Sigma Senior Master Black Belt. He teaches Six Sigma initiatives via Black Belts, Green Belts, Champions, and DFSS, both in hardware and software. He has mentored Six Sigma projects and certified new Black Belts and Green Belts. The American Society of Quality (ASQ) invited Sam in 2001, along with 12 other Six Sigma experts to develop the Six Sigma body of knowledge standard for the Black Belt Certification exam. Sam also has personally executed at least two major cross-functional six sigma projects each year for 5 years while supporting Seagate Technology. Sam also led Seagate’s Corporate Master Black Belt Council, comprising MBB’s from Seagate location s around the world. This council promotes world-class practices, develops and organizes tools and procedures, and promotes cross-organizational project facilitation.

4.1 Introduction to Software System Safety Engineering - 2 hours

Many spectacular accidents have resulted from software-related failures. In this tutorial, we cover the basics of software system safety engineering, with particular emphasis on the software system safety process, which is a tailoring of the traditional system safety process to modern software engineering. Specific topics within the process that will be covered include identifying safety-critical functions, development of software design requirements to mitigate risk, and safety analysis of the implementation of requirements.

4.2 Software System Safety Assessment of Systems Incorporating Non-Developmental Items - 2 hours

Non-Developmental Items (NDI), such as commercial-off-the-shelf software and legacy systems, create unique challenges for software systems safety. In this tutorial we start by identifying what are non-developmental items and their characteristics. Next we cover perceptions and misconceptions NDI, followed by a detailed look at safety issues and how to resolve these issues.

4.3 Formal Validation and Verification - 2 hours

In spite of three decades of software formal verification and validation (FV&V) research, there exists no ideal FV&V technique that works well for all FV&V concerns. That is, there is no one technique that enables (i) easy and correct construction of requirement specification of complex real-life properties, and (ii) complete verification coverage of complete real-life complex software with respect to those requirements. Moreover, many of the FV&V techniques are ineffective in handling temporal behavior of reactive systems. In this tutorial we present a visual tradeoff space we developed for the NASA IV&V Facility, called the FV&V tradeoff cuboid, for software and systems engineers to discuss the various tradeoffs (e.g. cost and coverage) between different FV&V approaches in order to select the appropriate techniques for V&V of a particular system.

4.4 Framework for Independent Formal Validation and Verification - 2 hours

In this tutorial we present a framework for augmenting independent validation and verification (IV&V) of software systems with computer-based IV&V techniques. The framework allows an IV&V team to capture its own understanding of the application as well as the expected behavior of any proposed system for solving the underlying problem by using an executable system reference model, which uses formal assertions to specify mission- and safety-critical behaviors. The framework uses execution-based model checking to validate the correctness of the assertions and to verify the correctness and adequacy of the system under test.

Track 4 Leader: Professor J. Bret Michael, Ph.D.

Dr. Michael is a Professor of Computer Science and Electrical & Computer Engineering at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. Prior to arriving at NPS, he was an Assistant Research Engineer with the University of California at Berkeley (1994-1998), conducting research on automated vehicle control and safety systems for automated highway systems. He served as a Formal Methods Engineer for Argonne National Laboratory (1992-1993), and was a member of the Research Staff at the Institute for Defense Analyses (1988-1992). His research interests include the following in the context of building dependable software-intensive systems and assessing the trustworthiness of such systems: formal methods in software engineering, reliability and safety engineering, computer security, and distributed computing. Dr. Michael is a Senior Member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), serving the Institute in several capacities: Chair of the IEEE Technical Committee on Safety of Systems, Associate Editor-in-Chief of IEEE Security & Privacy magazine, Associate Editor of the IEEE Systems Journal, and member of the Advisory Board of IEEE Software magazine. He also serves as a member of the U.S. Government Steering Committee of the Department of Defense's Information Assurance Technology Analysis Center (IATAC) and leads the Course Packaging Group of the Office of the Secretary of Defense's Early Start Team of the Integrated Software and Systems Engineering Curriculum (iSSEc) project to develop a model curriculum for graduate software engineering education. Dr. Michael received his Ph.D. in Information Technology from George Mason University in 1993.