4.5 Article

A Proposal for Hybrid Memristor-CMOS Spiking Neuromorphic Learning Systems

期刊

IEEE CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS MAGAZINE
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 74-88

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/MCAS.2013.2256271

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish grants
  2. European Regional Development Fund
  3. VULCANO [TEC2009-10639-C04-01]
  4. BIOSENSE [TEC2012-37868-C04-01]
  5. PNEUMA [PRI-PIMCHI-2011-0768]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent research in nanotechnology has led to the practical realization of nanoscale devices that behave as memristors, a device that was postulated in the seventies by Chua based on circuit theoretical reasonings. On the other hand, neuromorphic engineering, a discipline that implements physical artifacts based on neuroscience knowledge, has related neural learning mechanisms to the operation of memristors. As a result, neuro-inspired learning architectures can be proposed that exploit nanoscale memristors for building very large scale systems with very dense synaptic-like memory elements. At present, the deep understanding of the internal mechanisms governing memristor operation is still an open issue, and the practical realization of very large scale and reliable memristive fabric for neural learning applications is not a reality yet. However, in the meantime, researchers are proposing and analyzing potential circuit architectures that would combine a standard CMOS substrate with a memristive nanoscale fabric on top to realize hybrid memristor-CMOS neural learning systems. The focus of this paper is on one such architecture for implementing the very well established Spike-Timing-Dependent-Plasticity (STD P) learning mechanism found in biology. In this paper we quickly review spiking neural systems, STD P learning, and memristors, and propose a hybrid memristor-CMOS system architecture with the potential of implementing a large scale STD P learning spiking neural system. Such architecture would eventually allow to implement real-time brain-like processing

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据