4.8 Article

Avalanches and edge-of-chaos learning in neuromorphic nanowire networks

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-24260-z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neuromorphic nanowire networks exhibit neural-like dynamics, including phase transitions and avalanche criticality. The dynamical state at the edge-of-chaos is optimal for learning complex information processing tasks.
The brain's efficient information processing is enabled by the interplay between its neuro-synaptic elements and complex network structure. This work reports on the neuromorphic dynamics of nanowire networks (NWNs), a unique brain-inspired system with synapse-like memristive junctions embedded within a recurrent neural network-like structure. Simulation and experiment elucidate how collective memristive switching gives rise to long-range transport pathways, drastically altering the network's global state via a discontinuous phase transition. The spatio-temporal properties of switching dynamics are found to be consistent with avalanches displaying power-law size and life-time distributions, with exponents obeying the crackling noise relationship, thus satisfying criteria for criticality, as observed in cortical neuronal cultures. Furthermore, NWNs adaptively respond to time varying stimuli, exhibiting diverse dynamics tunable from order to chaos. Dynamical states at the edge-of-chaos are found to optimise information processing for increasingly complex learning tasks. Overall, these results reveal a rich repertoire of emergent, collective neural-like dynamics in NWNs, thus demonstrating the potential for a neuromorphic advantage in information processing. Neuromorphic nanowire networks are found to exhibit neural-like dynamics, including phase transitions and avalanche criticality. Hochstetter and Kuncic et al. show that the dynamical state at the edge-of-chaos is optimal for learning and favours computationally complex information processing tasks.

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

4.8
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