MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023749416 · doi:10.1039/d0nr01671c

Conductive-bridging random-access memories for emerging neuromorphic computing

2020· article· en· W3023749416 on OpenAlexaff
Jun‐Hwe Cha, Sang Yoon Yang, Jungyeop Oh, Shinhyun Choi, Sangsu Park, Byung Chul Jang, Wonbae Ahn, Sung‐Yool Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueNanoscale · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Centre
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsNeuromorphic engineeringMemristorBridging (networking)Von Neumann architectureScalabilityComputer scienceResistive random-access memoryNanotechnologyArtificial neural networkComputer architectureNanoclustersMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceElectronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringVoltageComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing utilisation of artificial intelligence, there is a renewed demand for the development of novel neuromorphic computing owing to the drawbacks of the existing computing paradigm based on the von Neumann architecture. Extensive studies have been performed on memristors as their electrical nature is similar to those of biological synapses and neurons. However, most hardware-based artificial neural networks (ANNs) have been developed with oxide-based memristors owing to their high compatibility with mature complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) processes. Considering the advantages of conductive-bridging random-access memories (CBRAMs), such as their high scalability, high on-off current with a wide dynamic range, and low off-current, over oxide-based memristors, extensive studies on CBRAMs are required. In this review, the basics of operation of CBRAMs are examined in detail, from the formation of metal nanoclusters to filament bridging. Additionally, state-of-the-art experimental demonstrations of CBRAM-based artificial synapses and neurons are presented. Finally, CBRAM-based ANNs are discussed, including deep neural networks and spiking neural networks, along with other emerging computing applications. This review is expected to pave the way toward further development of large-scale CBRAM array 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanoscaleSame topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207