Hi, Kumar; My understanding is that in the new flow that Walter and Arpad are working so hard on, a model can support both time domain and statistical simulations by returning equalizer filter (exact for LTI or approximate for non-LTI) in Init. Please correct me if I am wrong, Walter. Thanks, Fangyi From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of C. Kumar Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 5:08 PM To: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx; dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; vladimir_dmitriev-zdorov@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview actually that is a good idea; will eliminate duplication i.e if the model just uses init it should have null pointer for getwave --- On Wed, 10/14/09, Dmitriev-Zdorov, Vladimir <vladimir_dmitriev-zdorov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Dmitriev-Zdorov, Vladimir <vladimir_dmitriev-zdorov@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview To: wkatz@xxxxxxxxxx, dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx, ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 7:37 PM Walter, But why EDA platform can’t simply check the pointer to GetWave() function in the loaded library and see if it is zero or not? I thought that this is always possible. Vladimir -----Original Message----- From: ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ibis-macro-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Walter Katz Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 5:05 PM To: dkirsanov@xxxxxxxxxx; ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview Danil, There are a number of models that are truly LTI, and only have an Init. The GetWave_Exist=False is how the ami file tells the EDA tool that this is the case. 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 Danil Kirsanov Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 6:59 PM To: ibis-macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ibis-macro] Re: An AMI Overview 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