Simulation-Aware In-Context Policy Improvement for LLM-Aided Analog Layout Refinement
Organizations: Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, TX, USA
Abstract
Analog IC layout design remains a labor-intensive iterative process dominated by simulation-driven refinement. Although end-to-end layout generators accelerate initial placement and routing, they still require experts to manually tune layout optimization parameters with repeated post-layout simulations for stringent design specifications. While Bayesian Optimization (BO) is widely adopted for parameter tuning in analog IC design, at the layout level it typically requires hundreds to thousands of evaluations, each involving costly parasitic extraction and post-layout simulation, which makes it impractical. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in improving the sample efficiency of such simulation-driven tuning. However, their restricted access to geometric layout context and design-specific heuristics limits their ability to manipulate the layout optimization process. In this paper, we propose a simulation-aware LLM multi-agent framework that performs in-context policy improvement (ICPI) by iteratively updating layout optimization parameters exposed by an analog layout generator through an act-observe-reflect loop on compact structured layout representations. Experiments on real-world analog circuits show that, with only tens of post-layout simulations, our approach improves post-layout performance over the generator's built-in heuristics and BO-based tuning method.
Figures & tables
| Param. Family | Effect |
| Net weights | Increase the weight of selected nets in the placement objective. |
| Placement bias | Bias selected devices toward preferred layout directions in placement. |
| Symmetry | Enforce symmetry constraint on selected devices during placement and legalization. |
| Priority | Prioritize routing on critical nets. |
| Wire widths | Trade off parasitic resistance and capacitance during routing. |
| OTA1 | OTA2 | |||||||||||
| Method | Gain (dB) | UGB (MHz) | CMRR (dB) | PM (deg) | FoM | Area ( ) | Gain (dB) | UGB (MHz) | CMRR (dB) | PM (deg) | FoM | Area ( ) |
| Heuristic | 47.66 | 15.67 | 78.1 | 69.2 | 0.869 | 3592.9 | 53.15 | 1.454 | 55.70 | 59.4 | 0.696 | 7080.0 |
| BO | 62.18 | 53.80 | 54.89 | 69.3 | 0.979 | 4036.9 | 62.14 | 1.610 | 62.80 | 70.4 | 0.880 | 8857.3 |
| Ours w/o ICPI | 50.59 | 17.24 | 87.62 | 69.3 | 1.003 | 3288.3 | 55.70 | 1.611 | 67.36 | 72.6 | 0.868 | 6490.5 |
| Ours | 51.39 | 18.69 | 108.6 | 69.4 | 1.104 | 4031.4 | 62.72 | 1.597 | 80.86 | 72.3 | 1.038 | 6468.2 |
Electronic Design Automation
Electronic Design Automation uses algorithms and software to design, verify, optimize, and manufacture electronic circuits and systems.
See all 207 papers