Polymer-Based Memory Structures on Copper Substrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considering the limitations of dynamic memory structures based on the "1 Transistor –1 Capacitor" design paradigm related to their complexity and scaling, non-transistor based designs are being actively pursued. Bulk resistive memory designs that do not require additional transistor components per bit, are desirable candidates. This article presents a layered approach for formation of tungsten oxide and conducting polymer junctions to be used as a redox memory structure. This system includes an electrochemically deposited tungsten oxide film covered by electrophoretically deposited conducting polymer material capable of producing transient current-voltage characteristics that can be controlled by electric fields and exhibiting memory effects. The approach presented in this paper is particularly attractive since it provides a means to form these junctions on CMOS-friendly contact metals such as copper. Junctions between tungsten oxide and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene):poly(styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS) have been formed and characterized, demonstrating these junctions on copper substrates, significantly advancing this approach for making CMOS-compatible crossbar memory structures based on conducting polymer systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".