Low Power Verification · All levels

LPV Regression: Reports and Metrics

Reports and Metrics for LPV Regression.

Reports and metrics

Reports and Metrics for LPV Regression is anchored on illegal transition rate, corruption incidence, and deterministic replay quality under low-power scenarios. Convert observations into mechanism-backed and owner-bound actions.

A useful report explains why behavior moved, not only that behavior moved.

Evidence matrix

diagram
EVIDENCE MATRIX - LPV Regression

+-----------------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+---------------------------+
| Evidence                    | Tells you                      | Does not prove                 | Next action               |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+---------------------------+
| transition timeline traces  | first failing LP phase         | complete root-cause ownership  | correlate with intent map |
| UPF-aware assertion logs    | contract violations by phase   | silicon product impact         | map to scenario severity  |
| corruption/X classification | actionable vs noisy failures   | legal transition completeness  | replay key mode corners   |
| save/restore snapshots      | state integrity movement       | isolation correctness          | pair with crossing checks |
| before-after regressions    | mitigation movement quality    | long-tail stability            | run full matrix           |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------------+--------------------------------+---------------------------+
  • Track illegal transition rate, corruption incidence, and deterministic replay quality under low-power scenarios on representative low-power scenarios.

  • Include branch, seed, mode, and configuration metadata in every report.

  • Correlate observed symptoms with phase and boundary assumptions.

  • Call out contradictory evidence explicitly.

Low-power verification deep dive

Signoff confidence comes from triage discipline, reproducible proof, and explicit residual-risk decisions.

Concept diagram

diagram
LPV SIGNOFF LADDER

reproduce -> classify -> isolate boundary -> bounded fix -> replay -> signoff decision

Metric graph

diagram
SIGNOFF CONFIDENCE

open ambiguous failures  ██████
reproducible closures    ███████
residual-risk unknowns   ███

Metrics and artifacts to collect

  • X-prop triage classification report

  • bug root-cause closure packet

  • regression stability and recurrence trend

  • signoff checklist completion matrix

Mini case study

A signoff block cleared after the team replaced broad waivers with boundary-specific evidence and replay criteria.

Debug branches

  • Classify X behavior before broad waiving.

  • Capture one definitive artifact packet per closure claim.

  • Define residual risk and rollback path at signoff.

Senior review question

Ask: what exact low-power transition boundary failed first, and which artifact proves the closure claim reproducibly?

Key takeaways

  • Tie each LPV claim to a concrete transition boundary and one proving artifact.

  • Prefer minimal reversible fixes with explicit owner and rollback criteria.

Common pitfalls

  • Treating power-aware failures as random before boundary classification.

  • Waiving X-prop failures before proving impact and root cause.

  • Declaring closure without deterministic replay across key modes.

Report interpretation

Read metric movement with phase and boundary context.

A report is actionable only when it isolates first failing transition boundary.