2009
DOI: 10.1109/tns.2009.2013622
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of Multiple Cell Upset Induced by Heavy Ions in a 90 nm Bulk SRAM

Abstract: International audienc

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
11
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
2
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another observation drawn from Figure 6 (top) is a significant decrease in cross-section prediction at low-LET region. The predicted results are fit to the experimental results in [26]. At 5-10 MeV cm 2 /mg, the improved model is also reasonably fit to the experimental results.…”
Section: Nm Sramsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Another observation drawn from Figure 6 (top) is a significant decrease in cross-section prediction at low-LET region. The predicted results are fit to the experimental results in [26]. At 5-10 MeV cm 2 /mg, the improved model is also reasonably fit to the experimental results.…”
Section: Nm Sramsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Based on the proposed approach, the predicted cross sections are plotted in Figure 6. The experimental heavy ion upset cross sections in [26,27] are also plotted in the same diagram for comparison.…”
Section: Nm Srammentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The efficiency of this algorithm (known with name of Single Error Correction /Double Error Detection) can be extremely high, detecting almost all soft errors, revealing that SEUs come from single strikes. This condition is likely to be unsatisfied in a close future with the occurrence of a new failure mode as the Multiple Bit Upset (MBU) [16][17][18][19]. MBU is defined as several adjacent simultaneous bit swaps due to a unique particle hit or to several secondary ions.…”
Section: Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, "current injection" approach does not take into account internal changes generated within the device by the voltage variation induced in the circuit by the particle generation. So, the SER could be underestimated [10,11]. However, "current injection" provides a first order modeling necessary for quick analysis of thousand of cases necessary to perform SER prediction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%