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
  • Reading Path
  • STA Glossary
  • STA Metrics Reference
  • STA Mastery Cheatsheet
  • Timing Paths and Checks16
  • Constraints & SDC Fundamentals20
  • Delay Graph & Path Analysis16
  • Beyond Setup and Hold16
  • Multi-Corner Multi-Mode Signoff16
  • OCV, AOCV, POCV and Variation16
  • Crosstalk and Noise16
  • ECO and Closure16
  • STA Debug Playbook16
  • STA Interview Prep26
    • STA Whiteboard Framework
      • The Answer Framework
      • Drawing a Path
      • Naming the Failure
      • Grading Rubric
    • STA Framework Drills
    • Scenario: MMMC Storm
    • Scenario: ECO Under Pressure
    • Scenario: Constraint Ghost
    • STA Interview Q&A Bank
    • STA Interview Q&A Bank (Expanded)
  • Capstone Timing Signoff Lab4
Loading lesson

‹STA Whiteboard Framework
  1. Topics
  2. Static Timing Analysis
  3. STA Interview Prep
  4. STA Whiteboard Framework
  5. Grading Rubric

Part 10 · Interview Prep · All levels

Grading Rubric

A 0 to 4 scale: vocabulary, partial mechanism, mechanism with trade-off, and the full answer with evidence and limits.

On this page

    Why it matters

    Self-scoring is how you improve between practice sessions. The rubric is a shared language for candidates and interviewers: it says what separates a 2 from a 3 and a 3 from a 4.

    The scale

    Score

    What the answer contains

    What it sounds like

    0

    No answer, or a wrong one

    Silence, or a confident wrong statement

    1

    Vocabulary only

    Names setup, hold, derate, corner; no mechanism

    2

    Partial mechanism

    Explains the check on the circuit but no cost or evidence

    3

    Mechanism and trade-off

    Explains the check, offers more than one remedy, says what each costs

    4

    Mechanism, trade-off, evidence and limits

    Adds numbers, the report that closes it, and what the answer does not cover

    example.py
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19
    20
    def score(a):
        if a.get("wrong"):
            return 0
        if a.get("evidence") and a.get("trade_off") and a.get("mechanism"):
            return 4
        if a.get("trade_off") and a.get("mechanism"):
            return 3
        if a.get("mechanism"):
            return 2
        return 1 if a.get("vocabulary") else 0
    answers = {
        "wrong": {"wrong": True, "mechanism": True},
        "vocabulary only": {"vocabulary": True},
        "mechanism only": {"vocabulary": True, "mechanism": True},
        "mechanism and trade-off": {"vocabulary": True, "mechanism": True, "trade_off": True},
        "full": {"vocabulary": True, "mechanism": True, "trade_off": True, "evidence": True},
    }
    s = {k: score(v) for k, v in answers.items()}
    assert s == {"wrong": 0, "vocabulary only": 1, "mechanism only": 2, "mechanism and trade-off": 3, "full": 4}
    print("PASS: scores", s)

    Each level adds one framework step on top of the previous one: vocabulary, then mechanism, then trade-off, then evidence. Missing steps, not missing knowledge, usually cost the points: a candidate who knows the material but never offers a trade-off or names the evidence scores 2 on a question they could have answered at 4.

    What a 4 sounds like

    Question

    A 4 includes

    Why do we need hold fixes after setup fixes?

    Speed-ups erode hold slack; hold fixes use the setup slack that remains; the setup-plus-hold sum at the endpoint bounds what delay insertion can do; evidence is a before-and-after table across all scenarios.

    How does OCV change slack?

    Late and early derates on launch and capture, the common-path credit, the cost on a worked path, the method options and what each misses.

    Common pitfall

    Grading yourself on whether you know the answer. Grade on what you said aloud, step by step.

    Interview

    Ask the interviewer what a strong answer would include if you are unsure: it shows calibration, not weakness.

    Check yourself An answer explains a hold fix well and offers two alternatives with costs but names no report. What is the score?

    3: mechanism and trade-off are present; the evidence step is missing.

    Related topics

    • Naming the Failure

    • Next topic: Framework Drills

    Previous

    157 / 183

    Next: STA Framework Drills

    Up next

    Up nextSTA Framework Drills

    Sign in to save progress

    Practice this lessonReport an error

    See also

    • The Answer Framework
    • Drawing a Path