skip to main content
research-article

Multi-bit Data Flow Error Detection Method Based on SDC Vulnerability Analysis

Published:19 April 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

One of the most difficult data flow errors to detect caused by single-event upsets in space radiation is the Silent Data Corruption (SDC). To solve the problem of multi-bit upsets causing program SDC, an instruction multi-bit SDC vulnerability prediction model based on one-class support vector machine classification is built using SDC vulnerability analysis, which has more accurate vulnerability instruction identification capabilities. By hardening the program with selective instruction redundancy, we propose a multi-bit data flow error detection method for detecting SDC error (SDCVA-OCSVM), aiming to protect the data in the memory or register used by the program. We have also verified the effectiveness of the method through comparative experiments. The method has been verified to have a higher error detection rate and lower code size and time overhead.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Abazari M. A., Fazeli M., Patooghy A., and Miremadi S. G.. 2012. An efficient technique to tolerate MBU faults in register file of embedded processors. In Proceedings of the 16th CSI International Symposium on Computer Architecture and Digital Systems (CADS’12). IEEE, 115120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. [2] Bem Ewa Z. and Petelczyc Luke. 2003. MiniMIPS: A simulation project for the computer architecture laboratory. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 35, 1 (2003), 6468.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. [3] Breiman Leo. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learn. 45, 1 (2001), 532.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. [4] Chang Jin and Fan Yizhong. 2018. Wukong: Explorer of dark matter particles. KEXUE 70, 3 (2018), 1820.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Chatzidimitriou Athanasios, Papadimitriou George, Gavanas Christos, Katsoridas George, and Gizopoulos Dimitris. 2019. Multi-bit upsets vulnerability analysis of modern microprocessors. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Workload Characterization (IISWC’19). IEEE, 119130.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Chielle Eduardo, Rosa Felipe, Rodrigues Gennaro S., Tambara Lucas A., Tonfat Jorge, Macchione Eduardo, Aguirre Fernando, Added Nemitala, Medina Nilberto, Aguiar Vitor, et al. 2016. Reliability on ARM processors against soft errors through SIHFT techniques. IEEE Trans. Nuclear Sci. 63, 4 (2016), 22082216.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. [7] Fang Yi-Pin and Oates Anthony S.. 2016. Characterization of single bit and multiple cell soft error events in planar and FinFET SRAMs. IEEE Trans. Device Mater. Reliabil. 16, 2 (2016), 132137.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Goerl Roger C., Villa Paulo R. C., Poehls Letícia B., Bezerra Eduardo A., and Vargas Fabian L.. 2018. An efficient EDAC approach for handling multiple-bit upsets in memory array. Microelectron. Reliabil. 88 (2018), 214218.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. [9] Gong Huang, Yongping Zhao, and Yunlong Xie. 2020. Fault detection for turboshaft engine based on local density weighted one-class SVM algorithm. J. Comput. Appl. 40, 3, Article 917 (2020), 917–924.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [10] Hari Siva Kumar Sastry, Adve Sarita V., and Naeimi Helia. 2012. Low-cost program-level detectors for reducing silent data corruptions. In Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN’12). IEEE, 112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Hari Siva Kumar Sastry, Adve Sarita V., Naeimi Helia, and Ramachandran Pradeep. 2012. Relyzer: Exploiting application-level fault equivalence to analyze application resiliency to transient faults. ACM SIGARCH Comput. Arch. News 40, 1 (2012), 123134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Huang Hu, Guyer Samuel Z., and Rife Jason H.. 2017. Improving run-time bug detection in aviation software using program slicing. In Proceedings of the IEEE 7th Annual International Conference on CYBER Technology in Automation, Control, and Intelligent Systems (CYBER’17). IEEE, 12521256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. [13] Jain Anil K., Mao Jianchang, and Mohiuddin K. Moidin. 1996. Artificial neural networks: A tutorial. Computer 29, 3 (1996), 3144.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. [14] Kirsch Michael T., Regenie V. A., Aguilar M. L., Gonzalez O., Bay M., Davis M. L., Null C. H., Scully R. C., and Kichak R. A.. 2011. Technical support to the national highway traffic safety administration on the reported toyota motor corporation unintended acceleration investigation. NASA Engineering and Safety Center Technical Assessment Report (Jan. 2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. [15] Liu LiPing, Ci LinLin, Liu Wei, and Yang Hui. 2019. Identifying sdc-causing instructions based on random forests algorithm. KSII Trans. Internet Info. Syst. 13, 3 (2019), 15661582.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. [16] Ma Junchi, Duan Zongtao, and Tang Lei. 2019. A methodology to assess output vulnerability factors for detecting silent data corruption. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 118135118145.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. [17] Maglaras Leandros A., Jiang Jianmin, and Cruz Tiago. 2014. Integrated OCSVM mechanism for intrusion detection in SCADA systems. Electr. Lett. 50, 25 (2014), 19351936.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. [18] Mirjalili Seyedali, Mirjalili Seyed Mohammad, and Lewis Andrew. 2014. Grey wolf optimizer. Adv. Eng. Softw. 69 (2014), 4661.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. [19] Mittal Nitin, Singh Urvinder, and Sohi Balwinder Singh. 2016. Modified grey wolf optimizer for global engineering optimization. Appl. Comput. Intell. Soft Comput. 2016 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Murthy Sreerama K.. 1998. Automatic construction of decision trees from data: A multi-disciplinary survey. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 2, 4 (1998), 345389.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. [21] Nicolaidis Michael. 2010. Soft Errors in Modern Electronic Systems. Vol. 41. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. [22] Oh Nahmsuk, Shirvani Philip P., and McCluskey Edward J.. 2002. Error detection by duplicated instructions in super-scalar processors. IEEE Trans. Reliabil. 51, 1 (2002), 6375.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. [23] Pattabiraman Karthik, Nakka Nithin, Kalbarczyk Zbigniew, and Iyer Ravishankar. 2008. SymPLFIED: Symbolic program-level fault injection and error detection framework. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks With FTCS and DCC (DSN’08). IEEE, 472481.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. [24] Petersen Edward. 2011. Single-event Effects in Aerospace. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. [25] Reis George A., Chang Jonathan, Vachharajani Neil, Rangan Ram, and August David I.. 2005. SWIFT: Software implemented fault tolerance. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization. IEEE, 243254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Sabet M. Amin, Ghavami Behnam, and Raji Mohsen. 2018. GPU-Accelerated Soft Error Rate Analysis of Large-Scale Integrated Circuits. IEEE Design Test 35, 6 (2018), 7885.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. [27] Vijayan Arunkumar, Kiamehr Saman, Ebrahimi Mojtaba, Chakrabarty Krishnendu, and Tahoori Mehdi B.. 2017. Online soft-error vulnerability estimation for memory arrays and logic cores. IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Design Integr. Circ. Syst. 37, 2 (2017), 499511.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. [28] Wang Chen, Dryden Nikoli, Cappello Franck, and Snir Marc. 2018. Neural network based silent error detector. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (CLUSTER’18). IEEE, 168178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. [29] Wang Zhongfeng, Fu Yatong, Song Chunhe, Zeng Peng, and Qiao Lin. 2019. Power system anomaly detection based on OCSVM optimized by improved particle swarm optimization. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 181580181588.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. [30] Xu Xin and Li Man-Lap. 2012. Understanding soft error propagation using efficient vulnerability-driven fault injection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN’12). IEEE, 112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. [31] Yang Na and Wang Yun. 2019. Identify silent data corruption vulnerable instructions using SVM. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 4021040219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Yang Xue-Jun and Gao Long. 2007. Error flow model: Modeling and analysis of software propagating hardware faults. Ruan Jian Xue Bao (J. Softw.) 18, 4 (2007), 808820.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. [33] Yang Zi. 2019. “Space rescue”: A chronicle of China’s faulty satellite rescue. Yanhuang Chunqiu 09 (2019), 1923.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. [34] Yao Yuan-yuan, Ye Chun-ming, and Yang Feng. 2018. Improved grey wolf optimizer for the TFT-LCD module assembly scheduling problem. J. Chinese Comput. Syst. 39, 10, Article 2146 (2018), 7 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] Yoshimoto Shusuke, Amashita Takuro, Okumura Shunsuke, Kawaguchi Hiroshi, and Yoshimoto Masahiko. 2012. Multiple-bit-upset and single-bit-upset resilient 8T SRAM bitcell layout with divided wordline structure. IEICE Trans. Electron. 95, 10 (2012), 16751681.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Multi-bit Data Flow Error Detection Method Based on SDC Vulnerability Analysis

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems
          ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems  Volume 22, Issue 3
          May 2023
          546 pages
          ISSN:1539-9087
          EISSN:1558-3465
          DOI:10.1145/3592782
          • Editor:
          • Tulika Mitra
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 April 2023
          • Online AM: 24 November 2022
          • Accepted: 2 November 2022
          • Revised: 22 September 2022
          • Received: 10 January 2022
          Published in tecs Volume 22, Issue 3

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)220
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)16

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format