Despite the promising potential of large language model (LLM) based register-transfer-level (RTL) code generation, the overall success rate remains unsatisfactory. Errors arise from various factors, with limited understanding of specific failure causes hindering improvement. To address this, we conduct a comprehensive error analysis and manual categorization. Our findings reveal that most errors stem not from LLM reasoning limitations, but from insufficient RTL programming knowledge, poor understanding of circuit concepts, ambiguous design descriptions, or misinterpretation of complex multimodal inputs. Leveraging in-context learning, we propose targeted error correction techniques. Specifically, we construct a domain-specific knowledge base and employ retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to supply necessary RTL knowledge. To mitigate ambiguity errors, we introduce design description rules and implement a rule-checking mechanism. For multimodal misinterpretation, we integrate external tools to convert inputs into LLM-compatible meta-formats. For remaining errors, we adopt an iterative debugging loop (simulation-error localization-correction). Integrating these techniques into an LLM-based framework significantly improves performance. We incorporate these error correction techniques into a foundational LLM-based RTL code generation framework, resulting in significantly improved performance. Experimental results show that our enhanced framework achieves 91.0\% accuracy on the VerilogEval benchmark, surpassing the baseline code generation approach by 32.7\%, demonstrating the effectiveness of our methods.

Bug localization in Verilog code is a crucial and time-consuming task during the verification of hardware design. Since introduction, Large Language Models (LLMs) have showed their strong programming capabilities. However, no work has yet considered using LLMs for bug localization in Verilog code. This paper presents Location-is-Key, an opensource LLM solution to locate functional errors in Verilog snippets. LiK achieves high localization accuracy, with a pass@1 localization accuracy of 93.3% on our test dataset based on RTLLM, surpassing GPT-4's 77.9% and comparable to Claude-3.5's 90.8%. Additionally, the bug location obtained by LiK significantly improves GPT-3.5's bug repair efficiency (Functional pass@1 increased from 40.39% to 58.92%), highlighting the importance of bug localization in LLM-based Verilog debugging. Compared to existing methods, LiK only requires the design specification and the erroneous code snippet, without the need for testbenches, assertions, or any other EDA tools. This research demonstrates the feasibility of using LLMs for Verilog error localization, thus providing a new direction for automatic Verilog code debugging.

Engineering Design is undergoing a transformative shift with the advent of AI, marking a new era in how we approach product, system, and service planning. Large language models have demonstrated impressive capabilities in enabling this shift. Yet, with text as their only input modality, they cannot leverage the large body of visual artifacts that engineers have used for centuries and are accustomed to. This gap is addressed with the release of multimodal vision language models, such as GPT-4V, enabling AI to impact many more types of tasks. In light of these advancements, this paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of GPT-4V, a vision language model, across a wide spectrum of engineering design tasks, categorized into four main areas: Conceptual Design, System-Level and Detailed Design, Manufacturing and Inspection, and Engineering Education Tasks. Our study assesses GPT-4V's capabilities in design tasks such as sketch similarity analysis, concept selection using Pugh Charts, material selection, engineering drawing analysis, CAD generation, topology optimization, design for additive and subtractive manufacturing, spatial reasoning challenges, and textbook problems. Through this structured evaluation, we not only explore GPT-4V's proficiency in handling complex design and manufacturing challenges but also identify its limitations in complex engineering design applications. Our research establishes a foundation for future assessments of vision language models, emphasizing their immense potential for innovating and enhancing the engineering design and manufacturing landscape. It also contributes a set of benchmark testing datasets, with more than 1000 queries, for ongoing advancements and applications in this field.

Although there are designers who claim design is a mysterious activity not amenable to scientific examination, research into design continues Although there are publications by designers on how to design dating back to Roman times, notably by Vitruvius, the nineteenthcentury design thinkers actually began work on articulating design as a process (Durand 1802). However, it was not until the 1960s that major research programs were initiated. These programs were originally founded on the systems view and used concepts from operations research (Jones and Thornley 1963). More recently, information-processing models founded on AI concepts have provided an impetus for renewed research into design in its various aspects (Simon 1969; Coyne et al. 1990). Many foundational ideas in AI are proving to be useful in developing formal models of design as an activity.

This article begins with an elaboration of models of design as a process. It then introduces and describes a knowledge representation schema for design called design prototypes. This schema supports the initiation and continuation of the act of designing. Design prototypes are shown to provide a suitable framework to distinguish routine, innovative, and creative design.

This paper describes a device-independent diagnostic program called dart. The resulting generality allows it to be applied to a wide class of devices ranging from digital logic to nuclear reactors. Although this generality engenders some computational overhead on small problems, it facilitates the use of multiple design descriptions and thereby makes possible combinatoric savings that more than offsets this overhead on problems of realistic size.