Browse Prior Art Database

Automatic Optimum Diagnostic Strategy

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000045197D
Original Publication Date: 1983-Feb-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2005-Feb-06
Document File: 3 page(s) / 52K

Publishing Venue

IBM

Related People

Beaudoin, R: AUTHOR [+2]

Abstract

It is now possible to take greater advantage of existing precalculated diagnostics by determining if the diagnostics produced are adequate and, if not, automatically invoking additional analysis programming to refine problem resolution. The determining process decides the exclusiveness of the existing results. The intent of this strategy is to effectively use as much existing diagnostics as possible before invoking a more extensive diagnostic algorithm. Once invoked, the alternate algorithm will, through simulation, determine which faults can best explain the test results, hence producing more effective diagnostics.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
At least one non-text object (such as an image or picture) has been suppressed.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 53% of the total text.

Page 1 of 3

Automatic Optimum Diagnostic Strategy

It is now possible to take greater advantage of existing precalculated diagnostics by determining if the diagnostics produced are adequate and, if not, automatically invoking additional analysis programming to refine problem resolution. The determining process decides the exclusiveness of the existing results. The intent of this strategy is to effectively use as much existing diagnostics as possible before invoking a more extensive diagnostic algorithm. Once invoked, the alternate algorithm will, through simulation, determine which faults can best explain the test results, hence producing more effective diagnostics.

This approach minimizes the number of passes required to retest a failing card by producing the most effective diagnostic within the first pass. This approach also fulfills the idea of achieving increased diagnostic efficiency, more effective tester throughput and minimization of the component replacement rate.

One current approach utilizes the concept of producing diagnostics for the failing product from precalculated diagnostics on the AET (All Events Trace) and initiating a repair action based on those diagnostics. If, after repair and retest, the failure persists, then another component is selected for replacement from the diagnostic list. This procedure continues for a predetermined number of passes (usually 2 to 3 passes, depending on product), and, if still unsuccessful, the product is sent to additional analysis for detail evaluation.

In the new approach (see the figure) a decision will first be made by the diagnostic software if an "Exclusive Diagnostic" from the precalculated selection is present. If one is present and with optimal resolution, i.e., all faults detected are logically equivalent or all are within a single component, it will be used for repair. An "Exclusive Diagnostic" is defined as one which faults can explain all the failing outputs as well as the passing outputs.

In the cases where the above is not true, the automatic additional analysis program is invoked. It will determine...