The bibliographic entry was discovered and compiled by a machine, and published without a person checking it against the publication. The publication itself is the authors' own work — this badge says nothing about it.
From OpenAlex, which stores abstracts as an
index of words and their positions: what is shown is rebuilt from that,
and reads fluently whether or not it is what the author wrote.
Abstract
In 1997, SEMATECH set off an alarm in the industry when it warned that productivity gains related to IC manufacturing capabilities (which increased at about 40% per year) outpaced the productivity gains in IC design capabilities (which increased at about 20% per year). In spite of this alarming gap between growing silicon capacity and design capabilities, the industry never felt the effects. Why? This invited talk reviews the findings from the 2012 Wilson Research Group Functional Verification Study and identifies the trends that prevented the design productivity gap. However, a more ominous challenge than the design productivity gap is emerging. While silicon capacity grows at a Moore's Law rate, verification effort grows at a double exponential rate, and the solutions used to close the design productivity gap will not be sufficient to close the verification productivity gap. This invited talk concludes with a discussion on the changes needed to overcome the verification productivity gap.
How it got here
How it got here
agent via openalex
Added
2026-10-25 22:13 UTC
Not denied by
a person 2026-10-29 17:12 UTC
Cite it as
@misc{foster2013why,
title = {Why the design productivity gap never happened},
author = {Harry D. Foster},
year = {2013},
pages = {581--584},
doi = {10.1109/iccad.2013.6691175},
}