  The distributed minority and majority voting based redundancy (DMMR) scheme
was recently proposed as an efficient alternative to the conventional N-modular
redundancy (NMR) scheme for the physical design of mission/safety-critical
circuits and systems. The DMMR scheme enables significant improvements in fault
tolerance and design metrics compared to the NMR scheme albeit at the expense
of a slight decrease in the system reliability. In this context, this paper
studies the system reliability, fault tolerance and design metrics tradeoffs in
the DMMR scheme compared to the NMR scheme when the majority logic group of the
DMMR scheme is increased in size relative to the minority logic group. Some
example DMMR and NMR systems were realized using a 32/28nm CMOS process and
compared. The results show that 5-of-M DMMR systems have a similar or better
fault tolerance whilst requiring similar or fewer function modules than their
counterpart NMR systems and simultaneously achieve optimizations in design
metrics. Nevertheless, 3-of-M DMMR systems have the upper hand with respect to
fault tolerance and design metrics optimizations than the comparable NMR and
5-of-M DMMR systems. With regard to system reliability, NMR systems are closely
followed by 5-of-M DMMR systems which are closely followed by 3-of-M DMMR
systems. The verdict is 3-of-M DMMR systems are preferable to implement higher
levels of redundancy from a combined system reliability, fault tolerance and
design metrics perspective to realize mission/safety-critical circuits and
systems.
