A System-Level Simulator for RRAM-Based Neuromorphic Computing Chips
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in non-volatile resistive switching random access memory (RRAM) have made it a promising memory technology with potential applications in low-power and embedded in-memory computing devices owing to a number of advantages such as low-energy consumption, low area cost and good scaling. There have been proposals to employ RRAM in architecting chips for neuromorphic computing and artificial neural networks where matrix-vector multiplication can be computed in the analog domain in a single timestep. However, it is challenging to employ RRAM devices in neuromorphic chips owing to the non-ideal behavior of RRAM. In this article, we propose a cycle-accurate and scalable system-level simulator that can be used to study the effects of using RRAM devices in neuromorphic computing chips. The simulator models a spatial neuromorphic chip architecture containing many neural cores with RRAM crossbars connected via a Network-on-Chip (NoC). We focus on system-level simulation and demonstrate the effectiveness of our simulator in understanding how non-linear RRAM effects such as stuck-at-faults (SAFs), write variability, and random telegraph noise (RTN) can impact an application’s behavior. By using our simulator, we show that RTN and write variability can have adverse effects on an application. Nevertheless, we show that these effects can be mitigated through proper design choices and the implementation of a write-verify scheme.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".