| name | circuit-optimizer |
| description | Bayesian optimization for circuit auto-tuning — closed-loop optimizer where Codex acts as the BO engine. Sweeps gm/Id + L parameters, runs Spectre, scores against specs, and iterates. Supports progressive PVT corners. Use when optimizing circuit sizing, auto-tuning amplifier parameters, or running design-space exploration. Triggers on "optimize", "auto-tune", "bayesian", "find best sizing". |
| allowed-tools | Bash(*/virtuoso *) Read Write |
Circuit Optimizer (Bayesian)
Closed-loop circuit optimization: Codex as surrogate model, virtuoso-cli as simulator.
See full design: docs/plans/2026-04-05-bayesian-optimization-design.md
When to Use
- After initial sizing (from amp-copilot or manual) needs refinement
- When multiple specs conflict and manual iteration is tedious
- When PVT robustness is needed
- "Optimize my OTA", "auto-tune this circuit", "find best sizing for these specs"
Prerequisites
- A testbench exists in Virtuoso with parameterized device sizes (desVar)
- gm/Id lookup data exists for the process (
process_data/<pdk>/)
- Simulation setup works (sim-setup skill has been run at least once)
Step-by-Step Execution
Step 1: Build Problem Definition
Gather from user or introspect from schematic:
{
"optimization": {
"testbench": {"lib": "LIB", "cell": "CELL_TB", "view": "schematic"},
"parameters": [
{"name": "gmid_M1", "type": "gmid", "device": "input_pair", "range": [8, 22], "init": 14},
{"name": "L_M1", "type": "L", "device": "input_pair", "range": [300e-9, 2e-6], "init": 500e-9},
{"name": "gmid_M3", "type": "gmid", "device": "active_load", "range": [5, 15], "init": 7},
{"name": "L_M3", "type": "L", "device": "active_load", "range": [300e-9, 2e-6], "init": 500e-9},
{"name": "Cc", "type": "comp", "range": [0.5e-12, 5e-12], "init": 2.2e-12}
],
"specs": {
"gain_db": {"min": 70, "target": 80, "weight": 1.0},
"gbw_hz": {"min": 5e6, "target": 10e6, "weight": 1.0},
"pm_deg": {"min": 55, "target": 65, "weight": 0.8},
"power_w": {"max": 200e-6, "target": 100e-6, "weight": 0.5},
"sr_Vus": {"min": 5, "weight": 0.3}
},
"measurements": {
"gain_db": {"analysis": "ac", "expr": "value(dB20(VF(\"/OUT\")) 1)"},
"gbw_hz": {"analysis": "ac", "expr": "cross(dB20(VF(\"/OUT\")) 0 1 \"falling\")"},
"pm_deg": {"analysis": "ac", "expr": "value(phase(VF(\"/OUT\")) cross(dB20(VF(\"/OUT\")) 0 1 \"falling\")) + 180"},
"power_w": {"analysis": "dcOp", "expr": "value(IDC(\"/V0/PLUS\")) * 3.3"},
"sr_Vus": {"analysis": "tran", "expr": "slewRate(VT(\"/OUT\")) / 1e6"}
},
"corners": {
"phase1": [{"model": "tt", "temp": 27}],
"phase2": [{"model": "tt", "temp": 27}, {"model": "ff", "temp": 27}, {"model": "ss", "temp": 27}],
"phase3": [{"model": "tt", "temp": 27}, {"model": "ff", "temp": -40}, {"model": "ss", "temp": 125}]
},
"budget": {"max_iterations": 50, "max_sim_time_min": 120}
}
}
Parameter types:
gmid: gm/Id ratio. Range typically [5, 25]. Converted to W via lookup.
L: channel length. Range [Lmin, 2u].
comp: compensation element (Cc, Rz). Direct desVar.
Spec fields:
min: hard lower bound (constraint)
max: hard upper bound (constraint)
target: optimization goal (only matters after feasibility)
weight: relative importance among targets
Step 2: Convert gm/Id to W
For each gmid parameter, compute W using the gm/Id lookup table:
virtuoso skill exec 'RB__gmid_target = 14.0' --format json
virtuoso skill exec 'RB__L = 500e-9' --format json
For the optimizer, the flow is:
- User specifies required
gm for each device (from spec decomposition)
- Optimizer tunes
gmid and L
- W = gm / (gmid * Id_norm(gmid, L))
If gm is not fixed, use current budget: Id = I_budget / num_branches, then W = Id / Id_norm.
Step 3: Run One Iteration
virtuoso skill exec 'desVar("W_M1" 3.1e-6)' --format json
virtuoso skill exec 'desVar("L_M1" 500e-9)' --format json
virtuoso skill exec 'desVar("W_M3" 1.4e-6)' --format json
virtuoso sim run --analysis dc --param saveOppoint=t --timeout 120 --format json
virtuoso sim run --analysis ac --start 1 --stop 1e10 --dec 20 --timeout 120 --format json
virtuoso sim run --analysis tran --stop 20u --timeout 120 --format json
virtuoso sim measure --analysis ac \
--expr 'value(dB20(VF("/OUT")) 1)' \
--expr 'cross(dB20(VF("/OUT")) 0 1 "falling")' \
--format json
virtuoso sim measure --analysis dcOp \
--expr 'value(IDC("/V0/PLUS")) * 3.3' \
--format json
virtuoso skill exec 'modelFile(list("/path/models.lib" "ff"))' --format json
Step 4: Score the Result
SCORING FUNCTION (compute in Codex, not SKILL):
1. Feasibility check:
For each spec with min/max:
violation = max(0, spec_min - measured) / spec_min # undershoot
+ max(0, measured - spec_max) / spec_max # overshoot
feasibility_cost = sum of all violations
2. If infeasible (feasibility_cost > 0):
cost = 1000 + feasibility_cost
3. If feasible:
target_cost = sum(weight_i * |1 - measured_i / target_i|) for specs with targets
cost = target_cost
4. For Phase 2/3 (multi-corner):
cost = max(cost across all corners)
Step 5: Update History
Write/update the history JSON file:
History JSON structure:
{
"meta": {"cell": "...", "pdk": "...", "phase": 1, "iteration": 12, "status": "running"},
"problem": {"...problem definition..."},
"best": {
"iteration": 9,
"params": {"gmid_M1": 13.2, "L_M1": 6.5e-7},
"derived": {"W_M1": 3.1e-6, "Id_M1": 14.2e-6
Step 6: Suggest Next Point (Surrogate Reasoning)
This is where Codex acts as the Bayesian optimizer. Follow this protocol:
Every iteration, reason through:
-
Review history — Sort by cost. Identify top 3-5 points.
-
Identify trends — Which parameters improved results when changed?
- "Increasing L_M1 from 300n to 500n improved gain by 8dB"
- "gmid_M3 below 6 always causes PM violation"
-
Choose strategy (3:1 exploit:explore ratio):
- Exploit (iterations 0,1,2, 4,5,6, 8,9,10, ...): Perturb best point.
Pick 1-3 parameters that most correlate with improvement.
Adjust by 10-20% in the promising direction.
- Explore (iterations 3, 7, 11, ...): Sample a point far from all visited.
Use midpoints of unvisited parameter subregions.
-
Bound check — Ensure all parameters within range.
-
Physical check — gm/Id in [5, 25], L >= Lmin, W > 0.
Step 7: Decide Continue/Phase-Up/Stop
IF all specs met AND cost < 0.05:
→ CONVERGE. Report final sizing.
IF no improvement for 5 consecutive iterations:
IF current phase < 3:
→ PHASE UP. Move to next corner set. Reset stall counter.
ELSE:
→ STOP. Report best achievable.
IF iteration >= budget.max_iterations:
→ STOP. Report best.
OTHERWISE:
→ CONTINUE to next iteration.
Progress Report Format
Print after every iteration:
── Iteration 12/50 (Phase 1: TT) ──────────────────────
Parameters: gmid_M1=13.2 L_M1=650n gmid_M3=8.1 L_M3=500n Cc=2.8p
Derived: W_M1=3.1um W_M3=1.4um Id_M1=14.2uA
Results vs Spec:
gain_db: 74.2 (min:70 ✓ target:80 △)
gbw_hz: 8.1M (min:5M ✓ target:10M △)
pm_deg: 62 (min:55 ✓ target:65 △)
power_w: 178u (max:200u ✓ target:100u ✗)
sr_Vus: 6.3 (min:5 ✓)
Cost: 0.31 (feasible ✓) Best: 0.12 @ iter 9
Strategy: Exploit — reducing gmid_M6 to lower power
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Final Report
When optimization completes, report:
══ OPTIMIZATION COMPLETE ══════════════════════════════
Status: CONVERGED after 31 iterations (Phase 2)
Total simulation time: 47 min
Best Design (iteration 28):
gmid_M1=12.8 L_M1=700n → W_M1=3.5um Id_M1=15.1uA
gmid_M3=7.5 L_M3=500n → W_M3=1.6um Id_M3=15.1uA
gmid_M6=9.2 L_M6=350n → W_M6=5.8um Id_M6=48uA
Cc=2.5pF
Corner Results:
gain_db gbw_hz pm_deg power_w sr_Vus
tt_27: 76.3 9.2M 63 185u 7.1 ✓
ff_27: 70.1 12.8M 56 220u 9.2 ✓ (power marginal)
ss_27: 81.2 6.1M 68 158u 5.2 ✓
All specs met across Phase 2 corners.
History: process_data/smic13mmrf/opt_history/miller_ota_tb_20260405.json
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Resume Support
To resume a previous optimization:
ls process_data/*/opt_history/*.json
Integration with Other Skills
| Skill | Integration Point |
|---|
| amp-copilot | Provides initial sizing (iteration 0) |
| gm-over-id | Lookup W from gm/Id + L |
| sim-setup | Configure testbench before first iteration |
| sim-run | Execute Spectre each iteration |
| sim-measure | Extract spec values |
| spec-driven-circuit-design | Provides spec template and decomposition |