Unconventional computing based on magnetic tunnel junction
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The conventional computing method based on the von Neumann architecture is limited by a series of problems such as high energy consumption, finite data exchange bandwidth between processors and storage media, etc., and it is difficult to achieve higher computing efficiency. A more efficient unconventional computing architecture is urgently needed to overcome these problems. Neuromorphic computing and stochastic computing have been considered to be two competitive candidates for unconventional computing, due to their extraordinary potential for energy-efficient and high-performance computing. Although conventional electronic devices can mimic the topology of the human brain, these require high power consumption and large area. Spintronic devices represented by magnetic tunnel junctions (MTJs) exhibit remarkable high-energy efficiency, non-volatility, and similarity to biological nervous systems, making them one of the promising candidates for unconventional computing. In this work, we review the fundamentals of MTJs as well as the development of MTJ-based neurons, synapses, and probabilistic-bit. In the section on neuromorphic computing, we review a variety of neural networks composed of MTJ-based neurons and synapses, including multilayer perceptrons, convolutional neural networks, recurrent neural networks, and spiking neural networks, which are the closest to the biological neural system. In the section on stochastic computing, we review the applications of MTJ-based p-bits, including Boltzmann machines, Ising machines, and Bayesian networks. Furthermore, the challenges to developing these novel technologies are briefly discussed at the end of each section.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Memory and Neural Computing · Neural Networks and Reservoir Computing · Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. D. Monroe, Neuromorphic computing gets ready for the (really) big time. Commun. ACM 57(6), 13–15 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/260106910.1145/2601069 ↗
2. J. Han, M. Orshansky, “Approximate computing: An emerging paradigm for energy-efficient design. IEEE Eur. Test Symp. (ETS) (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/ETS.2013.656937010.1109/ETS.2013.6569370 ↗
3. C. Mead, Neuromorphic electronic systems. Proc. IEEE 78(10), 1629–1636 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1109/5.5835610.1109/5.58356 ↗
4. M. Mishra and M. Srivastava 2014 “A view of Artificial Neural Network,” in 2014 International Conference on Advances in Engineering & Technology Research (ICAETR - 2014). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAETR.2014.7012785.10.1109/ICAETR.2014.7012785 ↗
5. F. Rossi, B. Conan-Guez, Functional multi-layer perceptron: a non-linear tool for functional data analysis. Neural Netw. 18(1), 45–60 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2004.07.00110.1016/j.neunet.2004.07.001 ↗
6. V. Sze, Y.-H. Chen, T.-J. Yang, J.S. Emer, Efficient processing of deep neural networks: a tutorial and survey. Proc. IEEE 105(12), 2295–2329 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2017.276174010.1109/JPROC.2017.2761740 ↗
7. S. Albawi, T. A. Mohammed, and S. Al-Zawi, “Understanding of a convolutional neural network,” in 2017 International Conference on Engineering and Technology (ICET), 2017, pp. 1–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEngTechnol.2017.830818610.1109/ICEngTechnol.2017.8308186 ↗
8. T. Mikolov, S. Kombrink, L. Burget, J. Černocký, S. Khudanpur, Extensions of recurrent neural network language model. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics Speech Sig. Process. (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2011.594761110.1109/ICASSP.2011.5947611 ↗
9. S. Ghosh-Dastidar, H. Adeli, Spiking neural networks. Int. J. Neural Syst. 19(04), 295–308 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1142/S012906570900200210.1142/S0129065709002002 ↗
10. N. Caporale, Y. Dan, Spike timing-dependent plasticity: a Hebbian learning rule. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 31(1), 25–46 (2008)10.1146/annurev.neuro.31.060407.125639 ↗
11. K.Y. Camsari, S. Salahuddin, S. Datta, Implementing p-bits With Embedded MTJ. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 38(12), 1767–1770 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/LED.2017.276832110.1109/LED.2017.2768321 ↗
12. D.H. Ackley, G.E. Hinton, T.J. Sejnowski, A learning algorithm for boltzmann machines. Cogn. Sci. 9(1), 147–169 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(85)80012-410.1016/S0364-0213(85)80012-4 ↗
13. N. Zhang, S. Ding, J. Zhang, Y. Xue, An overview on Restricted Boltzmann Machines. Neurocomputing 275, 1186–1199 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2017.09.06510.1016/j.neucom.2017.09.065 ↗
14. R. Faria, K.Y. Camsari, S. Datta, Implementing Bayesian networks with embedded stochastic MRAM. AIP Adv. 8(4), 045101 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.502133210.1063/1.5021332 ↗
15. T. Albash, D.A. Lidar, Adiabatic quantum computation. Rev. Mod. Phys 90(1), 015002 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.90.01500210.1103/RevModPhys.90.015002 ↗
16. B. Sutton, K.Y. Camsari, B. Behin-Aein, S. Datta, Intrinsic optimization using stochastic nanomagnets. Sci. Rep. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep4437010.1038/srep44370 ↗
17. W.A. Borders, A.Z. Pervaiz, S. Fukami, K.Y. Camsari, H. Ohno, S. Datta, Integer factorization using stochastic magnetic tunnel junctions. Nature 573(7774), 393 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1557-910.1038/s41586-019-1557-9 ↗
18. J. Grollier, D. Querlioz, K.Y. Camsari, K. Everschor-Sitte, S. Fukami, M.D. Stiles, Neuromorphic spintronics. Nat. Electron 3(7), 360 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-019-0360-910.1038/s41928-019-0360-9 ↗
19. Z. Li, S. Zhang, Magnetization dynamics with a spin-transfer torque. Phys. Rev. B 68(2), 024404 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.68.02440410.1103/PhysRevB.68.024404 ↗
20. R. Ramaswamy, J.M. Lee, K. Cai, H. Yang, Recent advances in spin-orbit torques: Moving towards device applications. Appl. Phys. Rev 5(3), 031107 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.504179310.1063/1.5041793 ↗
21. F. Mahfouzi, R. Mishra, P.-H. Chang, H. Yang, N. Kioussis, Microscopic origin of spin-orbit torque in ferromagnetic heterostructures: A first-principles approach. Phys. Rev. B 101(6), 060405 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.06040510.1103/PhysRevB.101.060405 ↗
22. G. Vignale, Ten years of spin hall effect. J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 23(1), 3 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-009-0547-910.1007/s10948-009-0547-9 ↗
23. H.C. Koo et al., Rashba effect in functional spintronic devices. Adv. Mater. 32(51), 2002117 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20200211710.1002/adma.202002117 ↗
24. B.A. Bernevig, S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin hall effect. Phys. Rev. Lett 96(10), 106802 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.10680210.1103/PhysRevLett.96.106802 ↗
25. B. Rana, Y. Otani, Towards magnonic devices based on voltage-controlled magnetic anisotropy. Commun. Phys. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-019-0189-610.1038/s42005-019-0189-6 ↗
26. M. Julliere, Tunneling between ferromagnetic films. Phys. Lett. A 54(3), 225–226 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(75)90174-710.1016/0375-9601(75)90174-7 ↗
27. S. Zuo, H. Fan, K. Nazarpour, H. Heidari, A CMOS analog front-end for tunnelling magnetoresistive spintronic sensing systems. IEEE Int. Symp. Circuits Syst. (ISCAS) (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.2019.870221910.1109/ISCAS.2019.8702219 ↗
28. K. Rahimi, C. Diorio, C. Hernandez, M.D. Brockhausen, A simulation model for floating-gate MOS synapse transistors. IEEE Int. Symp.Circuits Syst. (ISCAS) (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.2002.101104210.1109/ISCAS.2002.1011042 ↗
29. R.R. Harrison, J.A. Bragg, P. Hasler, B.A. Minch, S.P. Deweerth, A CMOS programmable analog memory-cell array using floating-gate circuits. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Analog Digit. Signal Process 48(1), 4–11 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/82.91318110.1109/82.913181 ↗
30. S. Yu, H.-S. Philip Wong, Modeling the switching dynamics of programmable-metallization-cell (PMC) memory and its application as synapse device for a neuromorphic computation system. Int. Electron Devices Meet. (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEDM.2010.570341010.1109/IEDM.2010.5703410 ↗
31. A. Aggarwal, B. Hamilton, “Training artificial neural networks with memristive synapses: HSPICE-matlab co-simulation. Symp. Neural Netw. Appl. Electr. Eng. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/NEUREL.2012.641997410.1109/NEUREL.2012.6419974 ↗
32. L. Zheng, S. Shin, S.-M.S. Kang, “Memristor-based synapses and neurons for neuromorphic computing”, in. IEEE Int. Symp. Circuits Syst. (ISCAS) 2015, 1150–1153 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.2015.716884210.1109/ISCAS.2015.7168842 ↗
33. J.M. Skelton, D. Loke, T. Lee, S.R. Elliott, Ab Initio Molecular-Dynamics Simulation of Neuromorphic Computing in Phase-Change Memory Materials. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7(26), 14223–14230 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.5b0182510.1021/acsami.5b01825 ↗
34. Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, G. Hinton, Deep learning. Nature 521(7553), 536 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature1453910.1038/nature14539 ↗
35. V.-T. Nguyen, Q.-K. Trinh, R. Zhang, Y. Nakashima, STT-BSNN: an in-memory deep binary spiking neural network based on STT-MRAM. IEEE Access 9, 151373–151385 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.312568510.1109/ACCESS.2021.3125685 ↗
36. L.F. Abbott, B. DePasquale, R.-M. Memmesheimer, Building functional networks of spiking model neurons. Nat. Neurosci. 19(3), 350 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.424110.1038/nn.4241 ↗
37. I. Hayashi et al., A 250-MHz 18-Mb Full Ternary CAM With Low-Voltage Matchline Sensing Scheme in 65-nm CMOS. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 48(11), 2671–2680 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSSC.2013.227488810.1109/JSSC.2013.2274888 ↗
38. A. Amirany, M.H. Moaiyeri, K. Jafari, Nonvolatile Associative Memory Design Based on Spintronic Synapses and CNTFET Neurons. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. 10(1), 428–437 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1109/TETC.2020.302617910.1109/TETC.2020.3026179 ↗
39. Y. Ma et al., A 600-µW ultra-low-power associative processor for image pattern recognition employing magnetic tunnel junction-based nonvolatile memories with autonomic intelligent power-gating scheme. Jpn. J Appl. Phys. 55(4), 15 (2016). https://doi.org/10.7567/JJAP.55.04EF1510.7567/JJAP.55.04EF15 ↗
40. E. Kitagawa et al., Impact of ultra low power and fast write operation of advanced perpendicular MTJ on power reduction for high-performance mobile CPU. Int. Electron Devices Meet. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEDM.2012.647912910.1109/IEDM.2012.6479129 ↗
41. P. Lennie, The Cost of Cortical Computation. Curr. Biol. 13(6), 493–497 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00135-010.1016/S0960-9822(03)00135-0 ↗
42. K. Lee, J. J. Kan, and S. H. Kang, “Unified embedded non-volatile memory for emerging mobile markets”, in Proceedings of the 2014 international symposium on Low power electronics and design, New York, (NY, USA, 2014) pp. 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1145/2627369.263164110.1145/2627369.2631641 ↗
43. H. Noguchi et al., “A 250-MHz 256b-I/O 1-Mb STT-MRAM with advanced perpendicular MTJ based dual cell for nonvolatile magnetic caches to reduce active power of processors,” in 2013 Symposium on VLSI Technology 2013, pp. C108–C109.
44. J. Grollier, D. Querlioz, M.D. Stiles, Spintronic Nanodevices for Bioinspired Computing. Proc. IEEE 104(10), 2024–2039 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2016.259715210.1109/JPROC.2016.2597152 ↗
45. Y. Zhang et al., Electrical modeling of stochastic spin transfer torque writing in magnetic tunnel junctions for memory and logic applications. IEEE Trans. Magn. 49(7), 4375–4378 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2013.224225710.1109/TMAG.2013.2242257 ↗
46. A.F. Vincent et al., Spin-transfer torque magnetic memory as a stochastic memristive synapse for neuromorphic systems. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Circuits Syst. 9(2), 166–174 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2015.241442310.1109/TBCAS.2015.2414423 ↗
47. N. Locatelli et al., Spintronic devices as key elements for energy-efficient neuroinspired architectures. Des. Autom. Test Eur. Conf. Exhib. (DATE) (2015). https://doi.org/10.7873/DATE.2015.111710.7873/DATE.2015.1117 ↗
48. D. Zhang et al., “Energy-efficient neuromorphic computation based on compound spin synapse with stochastic learning”, in 2015. IEEE Int. Symp. Circuits Syst. (ISCAS) (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.2015.716893910.1109/ISCAS.2015.7168939 ↗
49. D. Zhang, L. Zeng, Y. Zhang, W. Zhao, J.O. Klein, “Stochastic spintronic device based synapses and spiking neurons for neuromorphic computation”, in 2016. IEEE/ACM Int. Symp. Nanoscale Archit. (NANOARCH) (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2950067.295010510.1145/2950067.2950105 ↗
50. K. Garello et al., “SOT-MRAM 300MM integration for low power and ultrafast embedded memories”, in 2018. IEEE Symp. VLSI Circuits (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/VLSIC.2018.850226910.1109/VLSIC.2018.8502269 ↗
51. G. Srinivasan, A. Sengupta, K. Roy, “Magnetic tunnel junction enabled all-spin stochastic spiking neural network”, in. Des. Autom. Test Eur. Conf. Exhib. (DATE) (2017). https://doi.org/10.23919/DATE.2017.792704510.23919/DATE.2017.7927045 ↗
52. V. Ostwal, R. Zand, R. DeMara, J. Appenzeller, “A Novel Compound Synapse Using Probabilistic Spin–Orbit-Torque Switching for MTJ-Based Deep Neural Networks”,. IEEE J. Explor. Solid-State Comput. Dev. Circuits 5(2), 182–187 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/JXCDC.2019.295646810.1109/JXCDC.2019.2956468 ↗
53. H. Ghanatian, M. Ronchini, H. Farkhani, F. Moradi, STDP implementation using multi-state spin−orbit torque synapse. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 37(2), 024004 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6641/ac419c10.1088/1361-6641/ac419c ↗
54. C. Timm, M. Di Ventra, Memristive properties of single-molecule magnets. Phys. Rev. B 86(10), 104427 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.10442710.1103/PhysRevB.86.104427 ↗
55. S. Lequeux et al., A magnetic synapse: multilevel spin-torque memristor with perpendicular anisotropy. Sci. Rep. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep3151010.1038/srep31510 ↗
56. S. Fukami, C. Zhang, S. DuttaGupta, A. Kurenkov, H. Ohno, Magnetization switching by spin–orbit torque in an antiferromagnet–ferromagnet bilayer system. Nat. Mater. 15(5), 535 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat456610.1038/nmat4566 ↗
57. D. Querlioz, O. Bichler, P. Dollfus, C. Gamrat, Immunity to device variations in a spiking neural network with memristive nanodevices. IEEE Trans. Nanotechnol. 12(3), 288–295 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TNANO.2013.225099510.1109/TNANO.2013.2250995 ↗
58. M. Prezioso, F. Merrikh-Bayat, B.D. Hoskins, G.C. Adam, K.K. Likharev, D.B. Strukov, Training and operation of an integrated neuromorphic network based on metal-oxide memristors. Nature 521(7550), 61 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature1444110.1038/nature14441 ↗
59. M. Wang, Y. Jiang, Compact model of domain wall MTJ driven by spin orbit torque and Dzyaloshinskii-moriya interaction. IEEE Trans. Magn. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2021.313819110.1109/TMAG.2021.3138191 ↗
60. S. Fukami et al., 2009 “Low-current perpendicular domain wall motion cell for scalable high-speed MRAM,”. Symp. VLSI Technol. pp. 230–231.
61. A. Sengupta, A. Ankit, K. Roy, “Performance analysis and benchmarking of all-spin spiking neural networks (Special session paper)”, in. Int. Joint Conf.Neural Netw. (IJCNN) 2017, 4557–4563 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2017.796643410.1109/IJCNN.2017.7966434 ↗
62. S.A. Siddiqui, S. Dutta, A. Tang, L. Liu, C.A. Ross, M.A. Baldo, Magnetic domain wall based synaptic and activation function generator for neuromorphic accelerators. Nano Lett. 20(2), 1033–1040 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b0420010.1021/acs.nanolett.9b04200 ↗
63. J. Lourembam et al., Multi-state magnetic tunnel junction programmable by nanosecond spin-orbit torque pulse sequence. Adv. Electron. Mater. 7(4), 2001133 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.20200113310.1002/aelm.202001133 ↗
64. J. Hong et al., A dual magnetic tunnel junction-based neuromorphic device. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2(12), 2000143 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/aisy.20200014310.1002/aisy.202000143 ↗
65. W.S. McCulloch, W. Pitts, A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 5(4), 115–133 (1943). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0247825910.1007/BF02478259 ↗
66. S. Aunet, B. Oelmann, S. Abdalla, Y. Berg, “Reconfigurable subthreshold CMOS perceptron”, in 2004. IEEE Int. Joint Conf. Neural Netw. 3, 1983–1988 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2004.138091910.1109/IJCNN.2004.1380919 ↗
67. M.A. Bañuelos-Saucedo et al., Implementation of a neuron model using FPGAS. J. Appl. Res. Technol. (2003). https://doi.org/10.22201/icat.16656423.2003.1.03.61110.22201/icat.16656423.2003.1.03.611 ↗
68. S. Jeyanthi, M. Subadra, “Implementation of single neuron using various activation functions with FPGA”, in 2014. IEEE Int. Conf. Adv. Commun. Control Comput. Technol. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCCT.2014.701927310.1109/ICACCCT.2014.7019273 ↗
69. H. Hikawa, A digital hardware pulse-mode neuron with piecewise linear activation function. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 14(5), 1028–1037 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2003.81605810.1109/TNN.2003.816058 ↗
70. C.-H. Tsai, Y.-T. Chih, W.H. Wong, C.-Y. Lee, “A Hardware-Efficient Sigmoid Function With Adjustable Precision for a Neural Network System”, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 62(11), 1073–1077 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2015.245653110.1109/TCSII.2015.2456531 ↗
71. D. Baptista, F. Morgado-Dias, Low-resource hardware implementation of the hyperbolic tangent for artificial neural networks. Neural Comput. Appl. 23(3), 601–607 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-013-1407-x10.1007/s00521-013-1407-x ↗
72. E.M. Izhikevich, Simple model of spiking neurons. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 14(6), 1569–1572 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2003.82044010.1109/TNN.2003.820440 ↗
73. H. Lim et al., Reliability of neuronal information conveyed by unreliable neuristor-based leaky integrate-and-fire neurons: a model study. Sci. Rep (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep0977610.1038/srep09776 ↗
74. J. Torrejon et al., Neuromorphic computing with nanoscale spintronic oscillators. Nature 547(7664), 428 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature2301110.1038/nature23011 ↗
75. S. Tsunegi et al., Evaluation of memory capacity of spin torque oscillator for recurrent neural networks. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys 57(12), 120307 (2018). https://doi.org/10.7567/JJAP.57.12030710.7567/JJAP.57.120307 ↗
76. E.J. Basham, D.W. Parent, “An analog circuit implementation of a quadratic integrate and fire neuron”, in 2009. Ann. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2009.533265510.1109/IEMBS.2009.5332655 ↗
77. S. Millner, A. Grübl, K. Meier, J. Schemmel, and M. Schwartz, 2010 “A VLSI Implementation of the Adaptive Exponential Integrate-and-Fire Neuron Model,”.Adv.Neural Inform. Process. Syst., vol. 23. Accessed: Sep. 01, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2010/hash/25b2822c2f5a3230abfadd476e8b04c9-Abstract.html
78. S. Hashimoto, H. Torikai, A Novel Hybrid Spiking Neuron: Bifurcations, Responses, and On-Chip Learning. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Regul. Pap. 57(8), 2168–2181 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSI.2010.204150710.1109/TCSI.2010.2041507 ↗
79. T. Hishiki and H. Torikai, 2009 Bifurcation Analysis of a Resonate and Fire Type Digital Spiking Neuron In: CS. Leung, M. Lee, Jonathan H. Chan (eds) Neural Information. Springer, USA, pp. 392–40010.1007/978-3-642-10684-2_44 ↗
80. T. Matsubara, H. Torikai, T. Hishiki, “A generalized rotate-and-fire digital spiking neuron model and its on-FPGA Learning”, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II Express Briefs 58(10), 677–681 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSII.2011.216170510.1109/TCSII.2011.2161705 ↗
81. T. Matsubara and H. Torikai, “Dynamic Response Behaviors of a Generalized Asynchronous Digital Spiking Neuron Model,” in Neural Information Processing, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 395–404. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24965-5_45.10.1007/978-3-642-24965-5_45 ↗
82. H. Torikai, A. Funew, T. Saito, “Approximation of Spike-trains by Digital Spiking Neuron”, in. Int. Joint Conf.Neural Netw. 2007, 2677–2682 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2007.437138110.1109/IJCNN.2007.4371381 ↗
83. C. Cerkez, I. Aybay, U. Halici, A digital neuron realization for the random neural network model. Proceed. Int. Conf. Neural Netw. 2, 1000–1004 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICNN.1997.61616310.1109/ICNN.1997.616163 ↗
84. K.Y. Camsari, R. Faria, B.M. Sutton, S. Datta, Stochastic p -bits for invertible logic. Phys. Rev 7(3), 031014 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.7.03101410.1103/PhysRevX.7.031014 ↗
85. A. Lucas, Ising formulations of many NP problems. Front. Phys. (2014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2014.0000510.3389/fphy.2014.00005 ↗
86. S. Geman, D. Geman, Stochastic relaxation, gibbs distributions, and the bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 6(6), 721–741 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1109/tpami.1984.476759610.1109/tpami.1984.4767596 ↗
87. B. Sutton, R. Faria, L.A. Ghantasala, R. Jaiswal, K.Y. Camsari, S. Datta, Autonomous Probabilistic Coprocessing With Petaflips per Second. IEEE Access 8, 157238–157252 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.301868210.1109/ACCESS.2020.3018682 ↗
88. A. Fukushima et al., Spin dice: A scalable truly random number generator based on spintronics. Appl. Phys. Express 7(8), 083001 (2014). https://doi.org/10.7567/APEX.7.08300110.7567/APEX.7.083001 ↗
89. D. Vodenicarevic et al., Low-energy truly random number generation with superparamagnetic tunnel junctions for unconventional computing. Phys. Rev. Appl 8(5), 054045 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.05404510.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.054045 ↗
90. W.T. Coffey, Y.P. Kalmykov, Thermal fluctuations of magnetic nanoparticles: Fifty years after Brown. J. Appl. Phys 112(12), 121301 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.475427210.1063/1.4754272 ↗
91. W.F. Brown, Thermal fluctuations of a single-domain particle. Phys. Rev. 130(5), 1677–1686 (1963). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.130.167710.1103/PhysRev.130.1677 ↗
92. J. Kaiser, A. Rustagi, K.Y. Camsari, J.Z. Sun, S. Datta, P. Upadhyaya, Subnanosecond fluctuations in low-barrier nanomagnets. Phys. Rev. Appl 12(5), 054056 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.12.05405610.1103/PhysRevApplied.12.054056 ↗
93. C. Safranski, J. Kaiser, P. Trouilloud, P. Hashemi, G. Hu, J.Z. Sun, Demonstration of nanosecond operation in stochastic magnetic tunnel junctions. Nano Lett. 21(5), 2040–2045 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c0465210.1021/acs.nanolett.0c04652 ↗
94. K. Hayakawa et al., Nanosecond Random Telegraph Noise in In-Plane Magnetic Tunnel Junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126(11), 117202 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.11720210.1103/PhysRevLett.126.117202 ↗
95. J. Deng, V.P.K. Miriyala, Z. Zhu, X. Fong, G. Liang, Voltage-controlled spintronic stochastic neuron for restricted boltzmann machine with weight sparsity. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 41(7), 1102–1105 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/LED.2020.299587410.1109/LED.2020.2995874 ↗
96. Y.C.C. Wu et al., Voltage-gate-assisted spin-orbit-torque magnetic random-access memory for high-density and low-power embedded applications. Phys. Rev. Appl (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.15.06401510.1103/PhysRevApplied.15.064015 ↗
97. B. Zhang, Y. Liu, T. Gao, D. Zhang, W. Zhao, L. Zeng, “Time division multiplexing ising computer using single tunable true random number generator based on spin torque nano-oscillator”, in. IEEE Int. Electron Dev. Meet. (IEDM) (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/IEDM19574.2021.972070210.1109/IEDM19574.2021.9720702 ↗
98. M. Suri, Ed., Applications of Emerging Memory Technology: Beyond Storage. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8379-3.10.1007/978-981-13-8379-3 ↗
99. J. Zhou, J. Chen, Prospect of spintronics in neuromorphic computing. Adv. Electron. Mater. 7(9), 2100465 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.20210046510.1002/aelm.202100465 ↗
100. I. Chakraborty, A. Jaiswal, A.K. Saha, S.K. Gupta, K. Roy, Pathways to efficient neuromorphic computing with non-volatile memory technologies. Appl. Phys. Rev 7(2), 021308 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.511353610.1063/1.5113536 ↗