(Back to Sessions List)
Session 18 - Analog Behavioral Modeling - Tool or Toy for Design?
8:00pm
Organizer:
David Rich, Technical Manager, Wireless IC Design, Lucent Technologies
Moderator:
David Rich, Lucent Technologies
Panelists:
Jim Barby, Professor, University of Waterloo, Canada
Georges Gielen, Professor, Katholieke University, Leuven, Belgium
Ken Kundert, Fellow, Cadence Design System
Larry Nagel, Proprietor, Omega Enterprises
Robert Pease, Fellow, National Semiconductor
Many people recognize that behavioral models are useful for verifying
functionality and interconnectivity of large-scale mixed-signal ICs.
This panel will address the question of whether or not behavioral models
are also useful for design. Can you use these models to speed up
circuit simulations and to identify problems that you might not find
during circuit simulation? Are they just the latest fad from the
pointy-haired bosses of the world?
The topics our esteemed panelists will address include the following:
Does it take longer to write a good model of a circuit than it does to
design and simulate the circuit in Spice?
Is breadboarding a circuit still the only method of determining if a new
circuit design will work in the real world?
Can behavioral simulators perform well when required to run a complex
circuit, such as a PLL with charge-pump leakage, thermal noise, and
phase detector dead zones? Do these simulators only work efficiently
when running simplified simulations?
Will a circuit simulator converge when behavioral models are introduced
into a circuit description?
Can a CAD tool automatically turn a Spice circuit description into a
behavioral model?
The panel will also discuss the usefulness of evolving VHDL and
Verilog standards for modeling analog/mixed-signal systems. Are these
HDLs even needed or should designers use a simpler language, such as
MatLab, or use the languages contained in high-level, mixed-signal
simulators such as Synopsys' COSSAP and Cadence's SPW?
(Back to Sessions List)
Session 19 - Not Like Your Father's ASIC Vendor
8:00pm
Organizers:
Larry Wissel, IBM
Jim Lipman, EDN Magazine
Moderator:
Jonah McLeod, Editor-in-Chief, ISD Magazine
Panelists:
Bruce Beers, Director of ASICs, IBM Microelectronics
Jeff Berkman, Vice President, ASIC Division, Toshiba America
Jeff Lewis, Vice President, Marketing, Artisan Components
Ian Mackintosh, General Manager, IP Division, Mentor Graphics
Magnus Ryde, President TSMC USA
Bob Wiederhold, Vice President, Deep-Submicron Business Unit, Cadence
ASIC suppliers are not evolving to serve the needs of the industry.
Custom design has long been recognized as providing a faster and denser
solution than ASICs, although the long custom design time and resource
price have been prohibitive for many applications.
However, these barriers have been altered by the emergence of new
players in the industry: third-party library suppliers and IP providers.
Additionally, the expansion of foundry services through alliances with
library providers, along with a broader set of tools and services from
EDA suppliers, have made custom design more accessible.
What will the ASIC supplier in the 21st century look like: Will EDA
suppliers, library vendors, IP providers, and foundries dominate the
industry? Will the role of the traditional ASIC supplier be reduced to
defining methodology? We have gathered an excellent panel with
representatives from each of these market segments. Please join us as
each panelist tries to define why his company's role in future ASIC
design will be the most important. And be ready to share your own
opinion.
(Back to Sessions List)
Session 20 - Silicon Vendors are from Venus, System Designers are from Mars
8:00pm
Organizer:
Mark Young, Senior ASIC Architect, Filanet Corp
Moderator:
Mark Young, Filanet Corp
Panelists:
John Harrington, Director, Computer and Peripheral ASICs, Lucent Microelectronics
A. Murota, Member of technical staff, Telecommunications and Networks NEC
Nancy Nettleton, ASIC Design Methodology Manager, Sun Microsystems
Mark Ross, Director of Engineering, Enterprise Line of Business, Cisco Systems
Anyone who has worked on a complex ASIC project in a system company or
with an ASIC silicon provider has probably noticed something odd.
Instead of a tightly coupled co-development team, there frequently
exists two totally different groups struggling to reach a common working
level. The problem is very similar to the parable about the blind men
touching different parts of an elephant for the first time and coming
away with completely different views of the same beast.
The disconnect occurs at all levels of the relationship. At the working
level, these problems translate into additional work, schedule delays,
increased complexity and, in extreme cases, product failure. As ASICs
grow in complexity, density, and performance, these problems are being
magnified rather than reduced. The emerging "system-on-a-chip" ASICs,
where an increasing number of the system issues are handled by the
silicon or IP vendor, makes understanding this problem even more
critical.
We've primed our panel to discuss some examples of classic disconnects
experienced by both silicon vendors and system designers in the world of
complex ASICs. The panel will also look at some of the emerging
problems posed by the next generation of ASIC-based systems.
(Back to Sessions List)
Session 21 - Dealing with Start-Ups: Is it Worth the Hassle?
8:00pm
Organizers:
Fadi Maamari, LogicVision
Atsushi Kurosawa, Intensys
Moderator:
Jennifer Smith, Senior Design Automation Analyst, Robertson Stephens and Co.
Panelists:
Vinod Agarwal,CEO LogicVision
Resve Saleh, Chairman and Vice President Engineering, Simplex Solutions
Steve Socolof, Vice President, New Ventures Group, Lucent Technologies
Bill Unger, General Partner Mayfield Fund
Ward Vercruysse, Senior CAD Manager, Sun Microsystems
Hot breakthrough technologies can often only be accessed through new,
generally unproven startup companies. Do the benefits outweigh the
risks? If so, when? Can startups really meet the needs of large
corporations or is it safer to wait for established suppliers to develop
similar technology or acquire the startup? What are the steps
corporations can take to ensure the viability of a startup before
committing to their technology? Is it possible to keep established
suppliers on their toes rather than in the "milk-the-cash-cow" mode? Can
big corporations effectively develop breakthrough technology in-house in
today's high-technology world?
Come see these questions debated by representatives of the venture
capitalist, startup, and corporate worlds. Be sure to voice your
opinions as well!
Back to Sessions List