Inherent stochasticity in phase-change memory devices
Abstract
A two terminal nanoscale device showing inherent stochastic behavior can be a key enabler for a wide range of applications such as stochastic computing, machine learning and neuromorphic engineering. In this article we investigate the inherent stochasticity associated with two key attributes of phase-change memory devices, namely, threshold switching and memory switching. The physical origin of this stochasticity is traced to the differences in the atomic configurations of the amorphous phase created via the melt-quench process after each RESET operation, which is validated by simulation and experimental results. We also present experimental results for one specific application namely, a true random number generator.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Intra-device variability in PCM is attributed to differences in atomic configurations associated with the amorphous phase change material created during the melt-quench process.
“The intra-device variability in PCM is attributed to the differences in atomic configurations associated with the amorphous phase change material created during the melt-quench process46.”
From Neuromorphic computing with multi-memristive synapses (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
Possible degradation due to long pulse cycling is the other concern for memristive switching based TRNG.
“Possible degradation due to long pulse cycling is the other concern for memristive switching based TRNG39.”
From A novel true random number generator based on a stochastic diffusive memristor (2017) · cites this paper as [39]
Most previous approaches utilizing switching variations to build TRNGs have defined a threshold value for some switching characteristic (e.g., SET voltage or read current).
“Most previous approaches utilizing switching variations to build TRNGs have defined a threshold value for some switching characteristic (for example, SET voltage30 or read current39).”
From A novel true random number generator based on a stochastic diffusive memristor (2017) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 35
- Authors
- Le Gallo, M., Tuma, T., Zipoli, F., Sebastian, A., & Eleftheriou, E.
- Affiliations
- IBM Research - Zurich (CH)
- Venue
- 2016 46th European Solid-State Device Research Conference (ESSDERC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2016-09
- Pages
- 373-376
- ISSN
- 1930-8876 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2538406804
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 7.04
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Solid-State Device Research Conference (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Memory and Neural Computing
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Phase-change materials and chalcogenides
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices
- Keywords
- phase-change memory, threshold switching, memory switching, melt quenching, reset operation, true random number generator, stochastic computing, neuromorphic engineering
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
