4.3 Article

Design and simulation of reliable and fast nanomagnetic conservative quantum-dot cellular automata (NCQCA) gate

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL ELECTRONICS
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 1992-2000

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10825-021-01763-y

关键词

QCA; Field-coupled nanocomputing; Nanomagnetic logic; Conservative logic; Testable NML

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study focuses on the design of nanomagnetic conservative quantum-dot cellular automata gate, which can be used as the basic block for more complex conservative NML circuits, and the design of clocked nanomagnetic majority gate. OOMMF physical simulation tool is used for evaluation, showing correct functionality of the conservative gate at room temperature.
Nanomagnetic logic (NML) is a promising candidate for the real implementation of quantum-dot cellular automata circuits and can be a proper alternative or complement to CMOS circuits. Like any other nanoscale technologies, NML circuits are also subject to fabrication variations. These variations along with fluctuations caused by thermal noise can affect the performance of these circuits. Therefore, design of NML circuits with high testability is an absolute necessity. Circuits based on conservative logic are inherently testable because of their specific properties. In this paper, considering the physical and geometrical properties of nanomagnets, a nanomagnetic conservative quantum-dot cellular automata gate is designed and evaluated. This circuit can be used as the basic block for the realization of more complex conservative NML circuits. To implement this circuit, the design of the clocked nanomagnetic majority gate is also provided. The OOMMF physical simulation tool is used for simulation and evaluation. The results show the correct functionality of the proposed conservative gate at room temperature. It operates about 34% faster than the NML Fredkin gate. Moreover, the NML version of the conventional Fredkin gate takes 90% more area than the proposed design.

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

4.3
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