Skip to content
DenseChip
Learn
PracticeCode labInterview

DenseChip

Navigate

Menu

LearnPracticeCode labInterview

Tools

All toolsSV editorCode repoResume
DenseChip

Practice, courses, and chip-design tools in one focused workspace.

LearnPracticeCode labInterviewToolsLearning paths

© 2026 DenseChip

AboutContactPrivacyTerms
Skip to lesson

Course contents

  • How to Use This Course
  • DFT Metrics Reference
  • DFT Glossary
  • Reading Path
  • Scan Fundamentals61
  • Compression & Diagnosis61
  • ATPG & Pattern Generation61
    • Fault Models
      • Fault Models: Mechanism
      • Fault Models: Inputs & Outputs
      • Fault Models: Reports & Metrics
      • Fault Models: Debug Playbook
      • Fault Models: Worked Example
      • Fault Models: Pitfalls & Red Flags
      • Fault Models: Interview Drills
      • Fault Models: Review Checklist
      • Fault Models: Theory Deep Dive
      • Fault Models: Design Space
      • Fault Models: Expanded Case Study
      • Fault Models: Step-by-Step Walkthrough
      • Fault Models: Comparison Matrix
      • Fault Models: Software / Programmer View
      • Fault Models: Silicon PPA Impact
    • ATPG Constraints
    • Pattern Signoff
    • Coverage Closure
    • ATPG & Pattern Generation: Tricky Q&A
  • MBIST & LBIST61
  • Boundary Scan & JTAG61
  • Test Timing & Power61
  • DFT Physical Integration61
  • DFT Interview Prep61
  • DFT / ATPG Cheatsheet
Loading lesson

‹Fault Models
  1. Topics
  2. Design for Test
  3. ATPG & Pattern Generation
  4. Fault Models
  5. Fault Models: Reports & Metrics

DFT / ATPG · All levels

Fault Models: Reports & Metrics

Reports & Metrics for Fault Models.

On this page

    Reports and metrics

    Reports & Metrics for Fault Models focuses on stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio. The goal is to convert metric movement into mechanism, owner, and release decision.

    A report should support a release decision for stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio. One headline number is rarely enough without setup tags and bucket-level evidence.

    Metric movement

    Diagram
    METRIC GRAPH - stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio
    
    quality metric
      ^
      |                         target
      |                       - - - - - - -
      |                  o after fix + regression
      |              o
      |         o baseline
      |    o regressed run
      +--------------------------------------> closure iteration
        input audit     focused fix      signoff review
    
    Readout:
      - explain what moved, why it moved, and who approved it

    Distribution view

    Diagram
    PATTERN HISTOGRAM - Fault Models
    
    pattern count
      |      ***
      |    *******
      |  ***********
      |*************  <- high-volume tail (optimize here)
      +--------------------> pattern buckets
       smoke  stuck-at  transition  diagnosis
    
    Balance quality and tester limits together.
    • Track stuck-at / transition / bridge coverage, untestable fault ratio by context and pattern class.

    • Review trend and bucket detail together.

    • Keep quality, timing, and power metrics in one dashboard.

    • Store each metric next to the artifact and run tag.

    DFT deep dive

    ATPG quality comes from fault model choice plus legal constraints, not raw pattern volume alone.

    Concept diagram

    Diagram
    ATPG FLOW
    
    fault model -> constraints -> generation -> simulation -> coverage closure -> signoff

    Metric graph

    Diagram
    COVERAGE GAP
    
    target coverage
      ^
      |      o before closure
      |          o after fixes
      +---------------------> iteration

    Reports and artifacts

    • fault model coverage

    • untestable class report

    • constraint legality errors

    • pattern signoff memo

    Mini case study

    Transition coverage stalled due to clock constraints mismatch; updated at-speed capture definitions recovered target.

    Debug branches

    • Classify untestable faults

    • Diff ATPG constraints each run

    • Pair coverage with pattern budget

    Senior review question

    Ask: what evidence proves this DFT decision is safe for production?

    Key takeaways

    • State metric, lot/corner context, and pattern tag with every claim.

    • Treat timing, power, and quality as one signoff problem.

    Common pitfalls

    • Chasing coverage without legality checks.

    • Ignoring test-power side effects of pattern changes.

    • Debugging silicon without reproducible tags.

    Reading reports

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    This content block can't be displayed here.

    Block type: unknown

    Previous

    129 / 493

    Next: Fault Models: Debug Playbook

    Up next

    Up nextFault Models: Debug Playbook

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • Fault Models: Mechanism
    • Fault Models: Worked Example
    • Fault Models: Pitfalls & Red Flags