{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01820020222446916, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010111223458038423, 'mean_word_length': 5.428571428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Investigation of efficiency and accuracy on incremental SSTA

This paper compares the characteristics and performances of incremental statistical static timing analysis (SSTA) methods. In contrast to incremental analysis in the deterministic static timing analysis (STA), timing error is indispensable for an efficient incremental SSTA, and the efficiency and accuracy have a trade-off relation. We compared and analyzed the differences between the incremental STA and SSTA, and presented the error source of the incremental SSTA. From the experimental results by three major incremental analysis methods, we presented the relationship between the efficiency and accuracy in incremental SSTA. We showed as well that all tested incremental SSTA methods give relatively accurate results that errors are lower than 1% with the some sacrifice of the efficiency. However, the merits and demerits of each method differs to that of each others, we compared the merits and demerits of each method.