Skip to main content
added 4 characters in body
Source Link

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a module on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Update: We now have more information on the Truth Table which is similar to a program like

if (b nxor c) return 1, else return b xor d. There isn't a simple case of using the enabler to "zero-out" a case that is definitely 0, as 0 can only be achieved from the else case which required 2 levels of operations, and the role of the enabler doesn't allow us to "one-out" cases that are definitely 1, which is the result we got from the truth table and seemed hardly useful information to wire into the circuit. How exactly do we translate such a checking procedure into an expression X.Y.Z which mimics the decoder perfectly?

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a module on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Update: We now have more information on the Truth Table which is similar to a program like

if (b nxor c) return 1, else return b xor d. There isn't a simple case of using the enabler to "zero-out" a case that is definitely 0, as 0 can only be achieved from the else case which required 2 levels of operations, and the role of the enabler doesn't allow us to "one-out" cases that are definitely 1, which is the result we got from the truth table and seemed hardly useful information to wire into the circuit. How exactly do we translate such a checking procedure into an expression X.Y.Z which mimics the decoder perfectly?

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a module on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Update: We now have more information on the Truth Table which is similar to a program like

if (b nxor c) return 1, else return b xor d. There isn't a simple case of using the enabler to "zero-out" a case that is definitely 0, as 0 can only be achieved from the else case which required 2 levels of operations, and the role of the enabler doesn't allow us to "one-out" cases that are definitely 1, which is the result we got from the truth table and seemed hardly useful information to wire into the circuit. How exactly do we translate such a checking procedure into an expression X.Y.Z which mimics the decoder perfectly?

added 579 characters in body
Source Link

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a coursemodule on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Can someone enlighten me howUpdate: We now have more information on the Truth Table which is similar to approach this problema program like

if (b nxor c) return 1, else return b xor d. There isn't a simple case of using the enabler to "zero-out" a case that is definitely 0, as 0 can only be achieved from the else case which required 2 levels of operations, and the role of the enabler doesn't allow us to "one-out" cases that are definitely 1, which is the result we got from the truth table and seemed hardly useful information to wire into the circuit. How exactly do we translate such a checking procedure into an expression X.Y.Z which mimics the decoder perfectly?

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a course on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Can someone enlighten me how to approach this problem?

I am a Computer Science undergraduate taking a module on Computer Organisation. There is this typical circuit design question that always appear in my assignment and I'm not sure what is the standard procedure to solve it and what skills do I need for it. This is one such problem where I'm required to get both a solution of 2 decoder and 1 logic gate and 1 decoder with 2 logic gate.

enter image description here

This is the Truth table I have drawnenter image description hereThe only deduction I have derived from it is that 'a' doesn't need to be wired as there is a total repetition in the pattern of b,c,d even as a switches over to 1, and I have to come up with some kind of boolean expression in the form of X.Y.Z where X,Y,Z are booleans formed from some b,c,d as it mimics the wiring in the Decoder with an enabler. The individual expressions inside must only contain 2 levels of boolean operators.

Update: We now have more information on the Truth Table which is similar to a program like

if (b nxor c) return 1, else return b xor d. There isn't a simple case of using the enabler to "zero-out" a case that is definitely 0, as 0 can only be achieved from the else case which required 2 levels of operations, and the role of the enabler doesn't allow us to "one-out" cases that are definitely 1, which is the result we got from the truth table and seemed hardly useful information to wire into the circuit. How exactly do we translate such a checking procedure into an expression X.Y.Z which mimics the decoder perfectly?

edited tags
Link
Source Link
Loading