<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>SiliFuzz: Fuzzing CPUs by proxy · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2110.11519/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2110.11519/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>SiliFuzz: Fuzzing CPUs by proxy — mentioned by ndesaulniers</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46906816</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2110.11519:46906816</guid><pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 23:17:35 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yeah, my current boss spent time weeding out such hardware bugs: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.11519 (EDIT: maybe https://x.com/Tesla_AI/status/1930686196201714027 is a more relevant citation) They found a bimodal distribution in failures over the lifetime of chips. Infant mortality was well understood. Silicon aging over time was much less well understood, and I still find surprising.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2110.11519/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AR</category></item></channel></rss>
