CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Hazard (logic)

undesirable effect in digital logic

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 29, 2026
Entity authorityQ753552
Source-derived summary

In digital logic, a hazard is an undesirable effect caused by either a deficiency in the system or external influences in both synchronous and asynchronous circuits. Logic hazards are manifestations of a problem in which changes in the input variables do not change the output correctly due to some form of delay caused by logic elements (NOT, AND, OR gates, etc.) This results in the logic not performing its function properly. The three different most common kinds of hazards are usually referred to as static, dynamic and function hazards.

Hazards are a temporary problem, as the logic circuit will eventually settle to the desired function. Therefore, in synchronous designs, it is standard practice to register the output of a circuit before it is being used in a different clock domain or routed out of the system, so that hazards do not cause any problems. If that is not the case, however, it is imperative that hazards be eliminated as they can have an effect on other connected systems.

Static hazards

A static hazard is a change of a signal state twice in a row when the signal is expected to stay constant. When one input signal changes, the output changes momentarily before stabilizing to the correct value. There are two types of static hazards:

Static-1 Hazard: the output is currently 1 and after the inputs change, the output momentarily changes to 0,1 before settling on 1

Static-0 Hazard: the output is currently 0 and after the inputs change, the output momentarily changes to 1,0 before settling on 0

In properly formed two-level AND-OR logic based on a Sum Of Products expression, there will be no static-0 hazards (but may still have static-1 hazards). Conversely, there will be no static-1 hazards in an OR-AND implementation of a Product Of Sums expression (but may still have static-0 hazards).

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Hazard (logic)” is undesirable effect in digital logic. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Hazard, logic and undesirable, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 306-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Hazard, logic and undesirable is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “undesirable effect in digital logic” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q753552. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Hazard (logic)”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Hazard (logic) primary sources, Hazard (logic) archive and Hazard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Hazard (logic)”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Hazard (logic)” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.