Neural network (NN)-based transistor models have proven to be a promising solution to accelerate device modeling. Although these models demonstrated remarkable speedup in circuit simulations, they were not rigorously tested in complex tasks within standard EDA tool flows for chip design, which require very high transistor model precision to provide accurate results and converge properly. To investigate their full potential and promise, we develop NN-based transistor models that accurately predict the drain current and various charges for a 3nm nanosheet, and employ the models for a standard cell library characterization. This enables us to evaluate the accuracy and speedup under a very wide range of SPICE simulations, benchmarking our models against an industry-standard implementation. Since standard cell library characterization involves thousands of SPICE simulations, it serves as a great benchmark for transistor model quality and consistency. To further evaluate model accuracy, we also perform analog- and digital-level simulations for various complex circuits. Our experiments reveal that NN-based models are a valid alternative to existing transistor compact models, capable of producing accurate delay and power estimates with a much higher speed and convergence time compared to the conventional Verilog-A-based industry-standard (BSIM-CMG) transistor compact model. Our NNs achieve sub-0.11% and 0.76% errors for delay and total power evaluation on a wide range of circuits, while taking up to 8 times less time during the standard cell library characterization. Additionally, we provide comprehensive information and guidance on NN accuracy, unveiling the relationship between NN size and its effect on circuit simulation precision.

Multi-agent LLM pipelines are often credited with gains in software engineering tasks, but it is rarely clear whether a gain stems from the typed contract between agents or from the specialized prompts that decomposition enables. We study this attribution problem in Requirements Engineering, comparing three architectures for classifying requirements as functional or non-functional and then prioritizing them with MoSCoW: a single-call baseline; a two-call variant that reuses the pipeline's specialized prompts but passes an unvalidated intermediate; and a pipeline with a Pydantic-validated typed state. The 18 conditions cover PROMISE NFR+ (625 requirements), three locally hosted small language models, and two languages. The F1 gain over the baseline is associated with the two-call, specialized-prompt variant (up to +0.075), whereas the typed state adds a small difference (-0.003 to +0.013) that is significant in one of six comparisons. Beyond accuracy, the typed pipeline contains out-of-range model outputs at the agent boundary, while the unvalidated variant fails later and drops the requirement, and it shows a small, reproducible increase in inter-model MoSCoW consistency whose cause our design cannot isolate. The study is associative: the contrasts bundle prompts, call count, and staged context, and the results come from three 7--8B models on one dataset. The implementation and replication package are archived on Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23380444).