Combinational logic

„ Basic logic
‰ Boolean algebra, proofs by re-writing, proofs by perfect induction
‰ logic functions, truth tables, and switches
‰ NOT, AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR, . . ., minimal set
„ Logic realization
‰ two-level logic and canonical forms
‰ incompletely specified functions
„ Simplification
‰ uniting theorem
‰ grouping of terms in Boolean functions
„ Alternate representations of Boolean functions
‰ cubes
‰ Karnaugh maps

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 1

Possible logic functions of two variables

„ There are 16 possible functions of 2 input variables:

‰ in general, there are 2**(2**n) functions of n inputs

X F
Y

X Y 16 possible functions (F0–F15)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1
1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
0 1
X Y not Y not X
X and Y X xor Y X=Y X nand Y
X or Y X nor Y not (X and Y)
not (X or Y)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 2

Cost of different logic functions

„ Different functions are easier or harder to implement

‰ each has a cost associated with the number of switches needed
‰ 0 (F0) and 1 (F15): require 0 switches
‰ X (F3) and Y (F5): require 0 switches, output is one of inputs
‰ X’ (F12) and Y’ (F10): require 2 switches for "inverter" or NOT-gate
‰ X NOR Y (F4) and X NAND Y (F14): require 4 switches
‰ X OR Y (F7) and X AND Y (F1): require 6 switches
‰ X = Y (F9) and X ⊕ Y (F6): require 16 switches

‰ thus, because NOT, NOR, and NAND are the cheapest they are the
functions we implement the most in practice

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 3

Minimal set of functions

„ Can we implement all logic functions from NOT, NOR, and NAND?
‰ For example, implementing X and Y
is the same as implementing not (X nand Y)
„ In fact, we can do it with only NOR or only NAND
‰ NOT is just a NAND or a NOR with both inputs tied together
X Y X nor Y X Y X nand Y
0 0 1 0 0 1
1 1 0 1 1 0

‰ and NAND and NOR are "duals",

that is, its easy to implement one using the other
X nand Y ≡ not ( (not X) nor (not Y) )
X nor Y ≡ not ( (not X) nand (not Y) )
„ But lets not move too fast . . .
‰ lets look at the mathematical foundation of logic

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 4

An algebraic structure

„ An algebraic structure consists of

‰ a set of elements B
‰ binary operations { + , • }
‰ and a unary operation { ’ }
‰ such that the following axioms hold:

1. the set B contains at least two elements: a, b

2. closure: a + b is in B a • b is in B
3. commutativity: a+b=b+a a•b=b•a
4. associativity: a + (b + c) = (a + b) + c a • (b • c) = (a • b) • c
5. identity: a+0=a a•1=a
6. distributivity: a + (b • c) = (a + b) • (a + c) a • (b + c) = (a • b) + (a • c)
7. complementarity: a + a’ = 1 a • a’ = 0

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 5

Boolean algebra

„ Boolean algebra
‰ B = {0, 1}
‰ variables
‰ + is logical OR, • is logical AND
‰ ’ is logical NOT
„ All algebraic axioms hold

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 6

Logic functions and Boolean algebra

„ Any logic function that can be expressed as a truth table can

be written as an expression in Boolean algebra using the
operators: ’, +, and •
X Y X•Y X Y X’ X’ • Y
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 0 0

X Y X’ Y’ X•Y X’ • Y’ ( X • Y ) + ( X’ • Y’ )
0 0 1 1 0 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 0 0
( X • Y ) + ( X’ • Y’ ) ≡ X=Y
1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 1

Boolean expression that is

true when the variables X
and Y have the same value
X, Y are Boolean algebra variables and false, otherwise
Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 7

Axioms and theorems of Boolean algebra

„ identity
1. X + 0 = X 1D. X • 1 = X
„ null
2. X + 1 = 1 2D. X • 0 = 0
„ idempotency:
3. X + X = X 3D. X • X = X
„ involution:
4. (X’)’ = X
„ complementarity:
5. X + X’ = 1 5D. X • X’ = 0
„ commutativity:
6. X + Y = Y + X 6D. X • Y = Y • X
„ associativity:
7. (X + Y) + Z = X + (Y + Z) 7D. (X • Y) • Z = X • (Y • Z)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 8

Axioms and theorems of Boolean algebra (cont’d)

„ distributivity:
8. X • (Y + Z) = (X • Y) + (X • Z) 8D. X + (Y • Z) = (X + Y) • (X + Z)
„ uniting:
9. X • Y + X • Y’ = X 9D. (X + Y) • (X + Y’) = X
„ absorption:
10. X + X • Y = X 10D. X • (X + Y) = X
11. (X + Y’) • Y = X • Y 11D. (X • Y’) + Y = X + Y
„ factoring:
12. (X + Y) • (X’ + Z) = 12D. X • Y + X’ • Z =
X • Z + X’ • Y (X + Z) • (X’ + Y)
„ concensus:
13. (X • Y) + (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z) = 13D. (X + Y) • (Y + Z) • (X’ + Z) =
X • Y + X’ • Z (X + Y) • (X’ + Z)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 9

Axioms and theorems of Boolean algebra (cont’d)

„ de Morgan’s:
14. (X + Y + ...)’ = X’ • Y’ • ... 14D. (X • Y • ...)’ = X’ + Y’ + ...
„ generalized de Morgan’s:
15. f’(X1,X2,...,Xn,0,1,+,•) = f(X1’,X2’,...,Xn’,1,0,•,+)

„ establishes relationship between • and +

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 10

Axioms and theorems of Boolean algebra (cont’d)

„ Duality
‰ a dual of a Boolean expression is derived by replacing
• by +, + by •, 0 by 1, and 1 by 0, and leaving variables unchanged
‰ any theorem that can be proven is thus also proven for its dual!
‰ a meta-theorem (a theorem about theorems)
„ duality:
16. X + Y + ... ⇔ X • Y • ...
„ generalized duality:
17. f (X1,X2,...,Xn,0,1,+,•) ⇔ f(X1,X2,...,Xn,1,0,•,+)

„ Different than deMorgan’s Law

‰ this is a statement about theorems
‰ this is not a way to manipulate (re-write) expressions

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 11

Proving theorems (rewriting)

„ Using the laws of Boolean algebra:

‰ e.g., prove the theorem: X • Y + X • Y’ = X
distributivity (8)
complementarity (5)
identity (1D)

‰ e.g., prove the theorem: X+X•Y = X

identity (1D)
distributivity (8)
identity (2)
identity (1D)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 12

Proving theorems (rewriting)

„ Using the laws of Boolean algebra:

‰ e.g., prove the theorem: X • Y + X • Y’ = X
distributivity (8) X • Y + X • Y’ = X • (Y + Y’)
complementarity (5) X • (Y + Y’) = X • (1)
identity (1D) X • (1) = X9

‰ e.g., prove the theorem: X+X•Y = X

identity (1D) X + X•Y = X •1 + X•Y
distributivity (8) X •1 + X•Y = X • (1 + Y)
identity (2) X • (1 + Y) = X • (1)
identity (1D) X • (1) = X 9

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 13

Activity

„ Prove the following using the laws of Boolean algebra:

‰ (X • Y) + (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z) = X • Y + X’ • Z

identity 1. X + 0 = X 1D. X • 1 = X
null 2. X + 1 = 1 2D. X • 0 = 0
complementarity: 5. X + X’ = 1 5D. X • X’ = 0
commutativity: 6. X + Y = Y + X 6D. X • Y = Y • X
associativity: 7. (X + Y) + Z = X + (Y + Z) 7D. (X • Y) • Z = X • (Y • Z)
distributivity: 8. X • (Y + Z) = (X • Y) + (X • Z) 8D. X + (Y • Z) = (X + Y) • (X + Z)
factoring: 12. (X + Y) • (X’ + Z) = X • Z + X’ • Y 12D. X • Y + X’ • Z = (X + Z) • (X’ + Y)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 14

Activity

„ Prove the following using the laws of Boolean algebra:

‰ (X • Y) + (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z) = X • Y + X’ • Z

(X • Y) + (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z)
identity (X • Y) + (1) • (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z)
complementarity (X • Y) + (X’ + X) • (Y • Z) + (X’ • Z)
distributivity (X • Y) + (X’ • Y • Z) + (X • Y • Z) + (X’ • Z)
commutativity (X • Y) + (X • Y • Z) + (X’ • Y • Z) + (X’ • Z)
factoring (X • Y) • (1 + Z) + (X’ • Z) • (1 + Y)
null (X • Y) • (1) + (X’ • Z) • (1)
identity (X • Y) + (X’ • Z) 9

identity 1. X + 0 = X 1D. X • 1 = X
null 2. X + 1 = 1 2D. X • 0 = 0
complementarity: 5. X + X’ = 1 5D. X • X’ = 0
commutativity: 6. X + Y = Y + X 6D. X • Y = Y • X
associativity: 7. (X + Y) + Z = X + (Y + Z) 7D. (X • Y) • Z = X • (Y • Z)
distributivity: 8. X • (Y + Z) = (X • Y) + (X • Z) 8D. X + (Y • Z) = (X + Y) • (X + Z)
factoring: 12. (X + Y) • (X’ + Z) = X • Z + X’ • Y 12D. X • Y + X’ • Z = (X + Z) • (X’ + Y)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 15

Proving theorems (perfect induction)

„ Using perfect induction (complete truth table):

‰ e.g., de Morgan’s:

X Y X’ Y’ (X + Y)’ X’ • Y’
(X + Y)’ = X’ • Y’ 0 0 1 1
NOR is equivalent to AND 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1
with inputs complemented 1 1 0 0

X Y X’ Y’ (X • Y)’ X’ + Y’
(X • Y)’ = X’ + Y’ 0 0 1 1
NAND is equivalent to OR 0 1 1 0
with inputs complemented 1 0 0 1
1 1 0 0

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 16

A simple example: 1-bit binary adder
Cout Cin

„ Inputs: A, B, Carry-in A A A A A
„ Outputs: Sum, Carry-out B B B B B
S S S S S

A
S
A B Cin Cout S B
0 0 0 Cout
Cin
0 0 1
0 1 0
0 1 1
1 0 0
1 0 1
1 1 0
1 1 1

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 17

A simple example: 1-bit binary adder

Cout Cin

„ Inputs: A, B, Carry-in A A A A A
„ Outputs: Sum, Carry-out B B B B B
S S S S S

A
S
A B Cin Cout S B
0 0 0 0 0 Cout
Cin
0 0 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 0
1 0 0 0 1
S = A’ B’ Cin + A’ B Cin’ + A B’ Cin’ + A B Cin
1 0 1 1 0 Cout = A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
1 1 0 1 0
1 1 1 1 1

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 18

Apply the theorems to simplify expressions

„ The theorems of Boolean algebra can simplify Boolean

expressions
‰ e.g., full adder’s carry-out function (same rules apply to any function)

Cout = A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 19

Apply the theorems to simplify expressions

„ The theorems of Boolean algebra can simplify Boolean

expressions
‰ e.g., full adder’s carry-out function (same rules apply to any function)

Cout = A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin

= A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin + A B Cin
= A’ B Cin + A B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= (A’ + A) B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= (1) B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 20

Apply the theorems to simplify expressions

„ The theorems of Boolean algebra can simplify Boolean

expressions
‰ e.g., full adder’s carry-out function (same rules apply to any function)

Cout = A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin

= A’ B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin + A B Cin
= A’ B Cin + A B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= (A’ + A) B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= (1) B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin + A B Cin
= B Cin + A B’ Cin + A B Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= B Cin + A (B’ + B) Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= B Cin + A (1) Cin + A B Cin’ + A B Cin
= B Cin + A Cin + A B (Cin’ + Cin)
= B Cin + A Cin + A B (1)
= B Cin + A Cin + A B adding extra terms
creates new factoring
opportunities
Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 21

Activity

„ Truth-table for a circuit that tallies the number of inputs that are 1
X1 X2 X3 T2 T1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 0

„ Write down Boolean expressions for T2 and T1

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 22

Activity

X1 X2 X3 T2 T1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 1 T1 = X1’ X2’ X3 + X1’ X2 X3’
0 1 1 1 0 + X1 X2’ X3’ + X1 X2 X3
1 0 0 0 1
1 0 1 1 0 = (X1’ X2’ + X1 X2) X3
1 1 0 1 0
+ (X1’ X2 + X1 X2’) X3’
= (X1 xor X2)’ X3
1 1 1 1 1
+ (X1 xor X2) X3’
= X1 xor X2 xor X3

T2 = X1’ X2 X3 + X1 X2’ X3
+ X1 X2 X3’ + X1 X2 X3

= X1’ (X2 X3) + X1 (X2 + X3)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 23

From Boolean expressions to logic gates

X Y
„ NOT X’ X ~X X Y 0 1
1 0

X Y Z
X 0 0 0
„ AND X • Y XY X∧Y Y
Z 0 1 0
1 0 0
1 1 1

X Y Z
„ OR X+Y X∨Y X
Z
0
0
0
1
0
1
Y
1 0 1
1 1 1

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 24

From Boolean expressions to logic gates (cont’d)

X Y Z
X 0 0 1
„ NAND Z 0 1 1
Y
1 0 1
1 1 0

X Y Z
„ NOR X 0 0 1
Z 0 1 0
Y 1 0 0
1 1 0

„ XOR X Y Z
X 0 0 0 X xor Y = X Y’ + X’ Y
X⊕Y Y
Z 0 1 1 X or Y but not both
1 0 1
("inequality", "difference")
1 1 0

„ XNOR X Y Z
X 0 0 1 X xnor Y = X Y + X’ Y’
X=Y Z 0 1 0 X and Y are the same
Y
1 0 0
1 1 1 ("equality", "coincidence")
Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 25

From Boolean expressions to logic gates (cont’d)

„ More than one way to map expressions to gates

‰ e.g., Z = A’ • B’ • (C + D) = (A’ • (B’ • (C + D)))

T2
T1

use of 3-input gate

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 26

Waveform view of logic functions

„ Just a sideways truth table

‰ but note how edges don’t line up exactly
‰ it takes time for a gate to switch its output!
time

change in Y takes time to "propagate" through gates

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 27

Choosing different realizations of a function

A B C Z
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1
0 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 two-level realization
1 0 0 0 (we don’t count NOT gates)
1 0 1 1
1 1 0 1
1 1 1 0

multi-level realization
(gates with fewer inputs)

XOR gate (easier to draw

but costlier to build)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 28

Which realization is best?

„ Reduce number of inputs

‰ literal: input variable (complemented or not)
„ can approximate cost of logic gate as 2 transistors per literal
„ why not count inverters?
‰ fewer literals means less transistors
„ smaller circuits
‰ fewer inputs implies faster gates
„ gates are smaller and thus also faster
‰ fan-ins (# of gate inputs) are limited in some technologies
„ Reduce number of gates
‰ fewer gates (and the packages they come in) means smaller circuits
„ directly influences manufacturing costs

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 29

Which realization is best? (cont’d)

„ Reduce number of levels of gates

‰ fewer level of gates implies reduced signal propagation delays
‰ minimum delay configuration typically requires more gates
„ wider, less deep circuits
„ How do we explore tradeoffs between increased circuit delay
and size?
‰ automated tools to generate different solutions
‰ logic minimization: reduce number of gates and complexity
‰ logic optimization: reduction while trading off against delay

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 30

Are all realizations equivalent?

„ Under the same input stimuli, the three alternative

implementations have
almost the same waveform behavior
‰ delays are different
‰ glitches (hazards) may arise – these could be bad, it depends
‰ variations due to differences in number of gate levels and structure
„ The three implementations are functionally equivalent

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 31

Implementing Boolean functions

„ Technology independent
‰ canonical forms
‰ two-level forms
‰ multi-level forms

„ Technology choices
‰ packages of a few gates
‰ regular logic
‰ two-level programmable logic
‰ multi-level programmable logic

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 32

Canonical forms

„ Truth table is the unique signature of a Boolean function

„ The same truth table can have many gate realizations
„ Canonical forms
‰ standard forms for a Boolean expression
‰ provides a unique algebraic signature

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 33

Sum-of-products canonical forms

„ Also known as disjunctive normal form

„ Also known as minterm expansion

F = 001 011 101 110 111

F = A’B’C + A’BC + AB’C + ABC’ + ABC

A B C F F’
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 1 0
0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 0
1 0 0 0 1
1 0 1 1 0
1 1 0 1 0
1 1 1 1 0 F’ = A’B’C’ + A’BC’ + AB’C’

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 34

Sum-of-products canonical form (cont’d)

„ Product term (or minterm)

‰ ANDed product of literals – input combination for which output is true
‰ each variable appears exactly once, true or inverted (but not both)

A B C minterms
F in canonical form:
0 0 0 A’B’C’ m0
F(A, B, C) = Σm(1,3,5,6,7)
0 0 1 A’B’C m1
= m1 + m3 + m5 + m6 + m7
0 1 0 A’BC’ m2
= A’B’C + A’BC + AB’C + ABC’ + ABC
0 1 1 A’BC m3
1 0 0 AB’C’ m4
canonical form ≠ minimal form
1 0 1 AB’C m5
F(A, B, C) = A’B’C + A’BC + AB’C + ABC + ABC’
1 1 0 ABC’ m6
= (A’B’ + A’B + AB’ + AB)C + ABC’
1 1 1 ABC m7
= ((A’ + A)(B’ + B))C + ABC’
= C + ABC’
short-hand notation for = ABC’ + C
minterms of 3 variables = AB + C

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 35

Product-of-sums canonical form

„ Also known as conjunctive normal form

„ Also known as maxterm expansion

F= 000 010 100

F = (A + B + C) (A + B’ + C) (A’ + B + C)

A B C F F’
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 1 0
0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 0
1 0 0 0 1
1 0 1 1 0
1 1 0 1 0
1 1 1 1 0

F’ = (A + B + C’) (A + B’ + C’) (A’ + B + C’) (A’ + B’ + C) (A’ + B’ + C’)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 36

 Product-of-sums canonical form (cont’d)

„ Sum term (or maxterm)

‰ ORed sum of literals – input combination for which output is false
‰ each variable appears exactly once, true or inverted (but not both)

A B C maxterms F in canonical form:

0 0 0 A+B+C M0 F(A, B, C) = ΠM(0,2,4)
0 0 1 A+B+C’ M1 = M0 • M2 • M4
0 1 0 A+B’+C M2 = (A + B + C) (A + B’ + C) (A’ + B + C)
0 1 1 A+B’+C’ M3
1 0 0 A’+B+C M4 canonical form ≠ minimal form
1 0 1 A’+B+C’ M5 F(A, B, C) = (A + B + C) (A + B’ + C) (A’ + B + C)
1 1 0 A’+B’+C M6 = (A + B + C) (A + B’ + C)
1 1 1 A’+B’+C’ M7 (A + B + C) (A’ + B + C)
= (A + C) (B + C)
short-hand notation for
maxterms of 3 variables

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 37

S-o-P, P-o-S, and de Morgan’s theorem

„ Sum-of-products of complement
‰ F’ = A’B’C’ + A’BC’ + AB’C’
„ Apply de Morgan’s and get the product-of-sums form
‰ (F’)’ = (A’B’C’ + A’BC’ + AB’C’)’
‰ F = (A + B + C) (A + B’ + C) (A’ + B + C)

„ Product-of-sums of complement
‰ F’ = (A + B + C’) (A + B’ + C’) (A’ + B + C’) (A’ + B’ + C) (A’ + B’ + C’)
„ Apply de Morgan’s and get the sum-of-product form
‰ (F’)’ = ( (A + B + C’)(A + B’ + C’)(A’ + B + C’)(A’ + B’ + C)(A’ + B’ + C’) )’
‰ F = A’B’C + A’BC + AB’C + ABC’ + ABC

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 38

Four alternative two-level implementations
of F = AB + C

canonical sum-of-products

minimized sum-of-products

canonical product-of-sums

minimized product-of-sums

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 39

Waveforms for the four alternatives

„ Waveforms are essentially identical

‰ except for timing hazards (glitches)
‰ delays almost identical (modeled as a delay per level, not type of
gate or number of inputs to gate)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 40

Mapping between canonical forms

„ Minterm to maxterm conversion

‰ use maxterms whose indices do not appear in minterm expansion
‰ e.g., F(A,B,C) = Σm(1,3,5,6,7) = ΠM(0,2,4)
„ Maxterm to minterm conversion
‰ use minterms whose indices do not appear in maxterm expansion
‰ e.g., F(A,B,C) = ΠM(0,2,4) = Σm(1,3,5,6,7)
„ Minterm expansion of F to minterm expansion of F’
‰ use minterms whose indices do not appear
‰ e.g., F(A,B,C) = Σm(1,3,5,6,7) F’(A,B,C) = Σm(0,2,4)
„ Maxterm expansion of F to maxterm expansion of F’
‰ use maxterms whose indices do not appear
‰ e.g., F(A,B,C) = ΠM(0,2,4) F’(A,B,C) = ΠM(1,3,5,6,7)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 41

Incompleteley specified functions

„ Example: binary coded decimal increment by 1

‰ BCD digits encode the decimal digits 0 – 9
in the bit patterns 0000 – 1001
A B C D W X Y Z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 off-set of W
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 on-set of W
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
don’t care (DC) set of W
0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 X X X X
1 0 1 1 X X X X these inputs patterns should
1 1 0 0 X X X X never be encountered in practice
1 1 0 1 X X X X – "don’t care" about output values
1 1 1 0 X X X X in these cases – might be useful
1 1 1 1 X X X X in minimization

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 42

Notation for incompletely specified functions

„ Don’t cares and canonical forms

‰ so far, only represented on-set
‰ also represent don’t-care-set
‰ need two of the three sets (on-set, off-set, dc-set)

„ Canonical representations of the BCD increment by 1 function:

‰ Z = m0 + m2 + m4 + m6 + m8 + d10 + d11 + d12 + d13 + d14 + d15

‰ Z = Σ [ m(0,2,4,6,8) + d(10,11,12,13,14,15) ]

‰ Z = M1 • M3 • M5 • M7 • M9 • D10 • D11 • D12 • D13 • D14 • D15

‰ Z = Π [ M(1,3,5,7,9) • D(10,11,12,13,14,15) ]

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 43

Simplification of two-level combinational logic

„ Finding a minimal sum of products or product of sums realization

‰ exploit don’t care information in the process
„ Algebraic simplification
‰ not an algorithmic/systematic procedure
‰ how do you know when the minimum realization has been found?
„ Computer-aided design tools
‰ precise solutions require very long computation times, especially for
functions with many inputs (> 10)
‰ heuristic methods employed – "educated guesses" to reduce amount of
computation and yield good if not best solutions
„ Hand methods still relevant
‰ to understand automatic tools and their strengths and weaknesses
‰ ability to check results (on small examples)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 44

The uniting theorem

„ Key tool to simplification: A (B’ + B) = A

„ Essence of simplification of two-level logic
‰ find two element subsets of the ON-set where only one variable
changes its value – this single varying variable can be eliminated
and a single product term used to represent both elements

F = A’B’+AB’ = (A’+A)B’ = B’

A B F
B has the same value in both on-set rows
0 0 1
– B remains, actually B’ because B is 0 in both cases
0 1 0
1 0 1 A has a different value in the two rows
– A is eliminated
1 1 0

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 45

Boolean cubes

„ Visual technique for indentifying when the uniting theorem

can be applied
„ n input variables = n-dimensional "cube"

01 11
0 1
Y 2-cube
1-cube
X 10
00
X

111 1111
0111

3-cube Y 4-cube
Z 101
Y
Z
000 X W
1000
0000 X

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 46

Mapping truth tables onto Boolean cubes

„ Uniting theorem combines two "faces" of a cube

into a larger "face"
„ Example:
F two faces of size 0 (nodes)
A B F combine into a face of size 1(line)
01 11
0 0 1
0 1 0 B

1 0 1 00 10
A
1 1 0

A varies within face, B does not

this face represents the literal B'
ON-set = solid nodes
OFF-set = empty nodes
DC-set = ×'d nodes

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 47

Three variable example

„ Binary full-adder carry-out logic

(A'+A)BCin

A B Cin Cout AB(Cin'+Cin)

111
0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 B C 101
1 0 0 0
000 A(B+B')Cin
1 0 1 1 A
1 1 0 1
1 1 1 1 the on-set is completely covered by
the combination (OR) of the subcubes
of lower dimensionality - note that “111”
is covered three times

Cout = BCin+AB+ACin

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 48

Higher dimensional cubes

„ Sub-cubes of higher dimension than 2

F(A,B,C) = Σm(4,5,6,7)
on-set forms a square
011 111 i.e., a cube of dimension 2
110 represents an expression in one variable
010
i.e., 3 dimensions – 2 dimensions
B 001
C 101 A is asserted (true) and unchanged
B and C vary
000 A 100
This subcube represents the
literal A

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 49

m-dimensional cubes in a n-dimensional

Boolean space
„ In a 3-cube (three variables):
‰ a 0-cube, i.e., a single node, yields a term in 3 literals
‰ a 1-cube, i.e., a line of two nodes, yields a term in 2 literals
‰ a 2-cube, i.e., a plane of four nodes, yields a term in 1 literal
‰ a 3-cube, i.e., a cube of eight nodes, yields a constant term "1"
„ In general,
‰ an m-subcube within an n-cube (m < n) yields a term
with n – m literals

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 50

Karnaugh maps

„ Flat map of Boolean cube

‰ wrap–around at edges
‰ hard to draw and visualize for more than 4 dimensions
‰ virtually impossible for more than 6 dimensions
„ Alternative to truth-tables to help visualize adjacencies
‰ guide to applying the uniting theorem
‰ on-set elements with only one variable changing value are
adjacent unlike the situation in a linear truth-table
A B F
A
B 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 0 1 0
0 2

1 0 0 1 0 1
1 3
1 1 0

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 51

Karnaugh maps (cont’d)

„ Numbering scheme based on Gray–code

‰ e.g., 00, 01, 11, 10
‰ only a single bit changes in code for adjacent map cells

AB A
C 00 01 11 10
A
0
0 2 6 4
0 4 12 8
C 1
1 3 7 5

B
1 5 13 9 D

A 3 7 15 11

C
2 6 14 10
0 2 6 4
B
C 13 = 1101= ABC’D
1 3 7 5
B

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 52

Adjacencies in Karnaugh maps

„ Wrap from first to last column

„ Wrap top row to bottom row

011 111
A
110
000 010 110 100 010

B 001
C 001 011 111 101 C 101
B 100
000 A

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 53

Karnaugh map examples

„ F= A
1 1

„ Cout = B 0 0

„ f(A,B,C) = Σm(0,4,5,7)
A
0 0 1 0

Cin 0 1 1 1
B
A
1 0 0 1

C 0 0 1 1
B

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 54

More Karnaugh map examples

A
0 0 1 1
G(A,B,C) = A
C 0 0 1 1
B

A
1 0 0 1
F(A,B,C) = Σm(0,4,5,7) = AC + B’C’
C 0 0 1 1
B

A
0 1 1 0 F' simply replace 1's with 0's and vice versa
F'(A,B,C) = Σ m(1,2,3,6)= BC’ + A’C
C 1 1 0 0
B

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 55

Karnaugh map: 4-variable example

„ F(A,B,C,D) = Σm(0,2,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,14,15)

F = C + A’ B D + B’ D’

A 1111
0111
1 0 0 1

0 1 0 0
D
C
1 1 1 1 D
C A
1000
1 1 1 1 0000 B
B
find the smallest number of the largest possible
subcubes to cover the ON-set
(fewer terms with fewer inputs per term)

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 56

Karnaugh maps: don’t cares

„ f(A,B,C,D) = Σ m(1,3,5,7,9) + d(6,12,13)

‰ without don't cares
„ f = A’D + B’C’D

A
0 0 X 0

1 1 X 1
D
1 1 0 0
C
0 X 0 0
B

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 57

Karnaugh maps: don’t cares (cont’d)

„ f(A,B,C,D) = Σ m(1,3,5,7,9) + d(6,12,13)

‰ f = A'D + B'C'D without don't cares
‰ f = A'D + C'D with don't cares

A
by using don't care as a "1"
0 0 X 0
a 2-cube can be formed
1 1 X 1 rather than a 1-cube to cover
D this node
1 1 0 0
C don't cares can be treated as
0 X 0 0 1s or 0s
B depending on which is more
advantageous

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 58

Activity

„ Minimize the function F = Σ m(0, 2, 7, 8, 14, 15) + d(3, 6, 9, 12, 13)

A
1 0 X 1

0 0 X X
D
X 1 1 0
C
1 X 1 0
B

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 59

Activity

„ Minimize the function F = Σ m(0, 2, 7, 8, 14, 15) + d(3, 6, 9, 12, 13)

A
A 1 0 X 1
1 0 X 1 F = AC’ +
0 0 X X
A’C + D
0 0 X X BC +
D X 1 1 0
AB + C
X 1 1 0
C A’B’D’ + 1 X 1 0
1 X 1 0 B’C’D’ B
A
B
1 0 X 1

F = BC + A’B’D’ + B’C’D’ 0 0 X X
D
F = A’C + AB + B’C’D’ X 1 1 0
C
1 X 1 0
B
Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 60
Combinational logic summary

„ Logic functions, truth tables, and switches

‰ NOT, AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR, . . ., minimal set
„ Axioms and theorems of Boolean algebra
‰ proofs by re-writing and perfect induction
„ Gate logic
‰ networks of Boolean functions and their time behavior
„ Canonical forms
‰ two-level and incompletely specified functions
„ Simplification
‰ a start at understanding two-level simplification
„ Later
‰ automation of simplification
‰ multi-level logic
‰ time behavior
‰ hardware description languages
‰ design case studies

Autumn 2006 CSE370 - II - Combinational Logic 61