Cited by 75Advanced Memory and Neural ComputingNeural Networks and ApplicationsFerroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices

Activity-difference training of deep neural networks using memristor crossbars

Yi, Su-in, Kendall, Jack D., Williams, R. Stanley, Kumar, Suhas·2022·Nature Electronics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41928-022-00869-w

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yi, S.-I., Kendall, J. D., Williams, R. S., & Kumar, S.
Affiliations
  • Texas A&M University (US)
  • Sandia National Laboratories California (US)
Corresponding author
Kumar, Suhas
Venue
Nature Electronics
Published
2022-11-21
ISSN
2520-1131 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309760588
Cited by
75
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 14
FWCI
4.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Nature Electronics (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE-NA0003525)
  • United States Department of Defense | United States Air Force | AFMC | Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR-FA9550-19-0213)
  • Texas A and M University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Memory and Neural Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
Keywords
memristor crossbar, memristor arrays, deep neural network training, neuromorphic hardware, in-memory computing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review