[ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview
- From: "C. Kumar" <kumarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx, wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
i am just saying that in that case there should be two separate models; one
which implements getwave and another which just uses the init
this will make the flow also that much clearer and easier
--- On Wed, 10/14/09, Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Walter Katz <wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview
To: kumarchi@xxxxxxxxx, ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 7:47 PM
Kumar,
If you think the EDA tool should do nothing with the impulse response
returned for the Init call, then just ignore it. We absolutely should not
prevent model maker from giving the EDA tool additional information that the
EDA tool could use if it wants to.
Walter
Walter Katz
303.449-2308
Mobile
720.333-1107
wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx
www.sisoft.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of C. Kumar
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009
7:23 PM
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI
Overview
i agree..
if the model modifies the init it is the only thing it should be doing. there
should not be any getwave
--- On Wed, 10/14/09, Danil Kirsanov <dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
From: Danil Kirsanov <dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview
To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 6:59 PM
Dear colleagues,
I would like to clarify one basic principle of AMI modeling,
hoping that all of us agree with it.
I believe that the model writer should never do a
double-counting: if he modified the channel impulse response in Init() to
model some effect, he should not model this effect in Getwave(). So he cannot
put the “true” model in GetWave() and it’s linear approximation in Init(). If
both types of behavior are expected, there should be two models (or some
internal flag that changes the behavior of the model).
If this assumption is true, statistical (linear) simulator
always works with Init() function of the model, while pattern-dependent
(non-linear) simulator works with both Init() and GetWave() and I do not see
any necessity for Get_Wave_Exists flag.
Best,
Danil
Other related posts:
