Democratizing Design: How The CHIPS Act Is Reshaping EDA And Semiconductor Innovation

After 26 years in the electronics industry, I’ve witnessed countless technological shifts, but few have been as transformative — or as promising — as what we’re experiencing with the CHIPS Act. I spoke at a recent 62^nd DAC panel discussion alongside industry colleagues Saverio Fazzari from Booz Allen Hamilton and Vivek Prasad from a non-profit organization established to operate the National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC). I found myself reflecting on how this landmark legislation is fundamentally changing not just manufacturing, but the entire semiconductor design ecosystem.

Beyond the Foundries: A Design Revolution

While much of the public attention around the CHIPS Act has focused on bringing manufacturing back to the U.S., what excites me most as someone who’s spent decades in electronic design is how it’s reshaping the design landscape. At Keysight, we’re seeing firsthand how government investment is enabling us to take risks and pursue partnerships that simply wouldn’t have been possible before.

The CHIPS Act has created what I call an “innovation permission structure” – a framework that allows companies like ours to collaborate with universities, startups, and even competitors in ways that were previously unthinkable. We’re participating in programs and partnerships that we would have walked away from just a few years ago, not because they weren’t valuable, but because the traditional business case wasn’t there.

The AI-Driven Democratization of RF Design

One area generating excitement is AI-driven design for radio frequency (RF) ICs. For years, RF design has been viewed as the “black magic” of semiconductor engineering. Even during my university days, we used to joke that RF and electromagnetics professors were more like wizards than engineers — that’s how complex and specialized the field seemed.

But AI is changing everything. We’re now exploring whether we can truly automate RF design, synthesize circuits in the millimeter wave space, and generate designs that human engineers might never have conceived. I’ve seen papers showing AI-generated RF circuits that look almost alien – designs that emerged from pure optimization rather than human intuition yet perform brilliantly in simulation.

This represents a fundamental shift from the traditional approach where you might need multiple Ph.Ds to tackle a complex RF design problem. We’re moving toward a world where AI can democratize access to these capabilities, allowing smaller teams and newer companies to compete in spaces that were previously dominated by large, established players.

The Collaboration Paradox

This CHIPS Act era is also forcing us to rethink the balance between collaboration and competition – and that’s a good thing. During our panel discussion, this tension came up repeatedly. How do you collaborate on foundational research while maintaining competitive advantage? How do you share data and insights while protecting intellectual property?

The answer, I believe, lies in understanding different time horizons. We can collaborate on the fundamental research that might not bear fruit for five to ten years, while still competing on the products and solutions we’re bringing to market today. The CHIPS Act is essentially providing a framework for this kind of long-term, pre-competitive collaboration.

At Keysight, we’ve had to hire additional staff just to help us navigate the intellectual property landscape – distinguishing between foreground IP that we develop as part of these programs and background IP that we bring to the table. It’s complex, but it’s manageable, and the benefits far outweigh the administrative burden.

The Data Dilemma

One of the thorniest issues we’re grappling with is data ownership and sharing. In the consumer world, we’re all comfortable with the idea that our ride-sharing data gets aggregated and used to improve services. But in semiconductor design, that data has traditionally been closely guarded – it’s in private clouds, secure environments, locked away within companies.

The challenge is that everyone wants AI models trained on rich, diverse datasets, but no one wants to share their own data. It’s a classic collective action problem. The government, through various CHIPS Act programs, is trying to create frameworks for shared data resources, but we’re still figuring out the mechanisms.

This is where the democratization aspect becomes really interesting. If we can solve the data-sharing challenge, we could enable smaller companies and startups to access the kind of training data that has historically been available only to the largest players.

Measuring Success Across Time Horizons

When people ask me about ROI from the CHIPS Act, I think about different time horizons. In the short term, success looks like new technologies reaching market faster than they would have otherwise. Can we accelerate the development cycle? Can we bring innovations to market that might have taken years longer through traditional R&D paths?

In the medium term, I’m looking at fundamental shifts in the industry structure. Are we seeing more Ph.D programs in semiconductors? More startups tackling silicon design? More innovation happening domestically rather than offshore?

And in the long term, the question is whether we’ve fundamentally altered the trajectory of American semiconductor leadership. For years, the assumption was that cutting-edge design work would migrate overseas. The CHIPS Act represents a bet that we can reverse that trend.

The Workforce Challenge

Perhaps the most critical factor in our success will be workforce development. We’re facing a dual challenge: the Baby Boom generation of semiconductor engineers is retiring at an accelerating pace, while the pipeline of new talent remains insufficient.

The good news is that we’re seeing green shoots. More students are entering graduate programs focused on semiconductor work. Companies are investing more heavily in internship programs. At Keysight, we’re actively hiring interns and working with universities like UT Austin to identify and develop the next generation of EDA engineers.

But we need to do more. The government investment is creating a spotlight effect that’s helping, but we need sustained commitment from industry as well. Companies need to invest in continuing education, sponsor Ph.D programs, and create pathways for people to enter and advance in semiconductor careers.

An Exciting Era of Transformation

As I told the panel audience, this is an exciting era to be in. The convergence of government investment, industry innovation, and academic research is creating opportunities that simply didn’t exist a few years ago. For those of us who’ve spent our careers in EDA, it feels like we’re at an inflection point.

The CHIPS Act isn’t just about bringing manufacturing back to America – though that’s certainly important. It’s about creating an ecosystem where innovation can flourish, where new ideas can be tested and scaled, and where the next generation of semiconductor breakthroughs will emerge.

We’re still in the early days of this transformation. The full impact won’t be clear for years to come. But from where I sit, having witnessed 26 years of industry evolution, I’m more optimistic about the future of American semiconductor design than I’ve been in a long time.

The question now is whether we, as an industry, will fully embrace this opportunity. As my fellow panelist Saverio noted, the framework is there – it’s up to us to leverage it effectively. The stakes are high, but so is the potential reward.