Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 181 references

Contemporary implementations of spiking bio-inspired neural networks

T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This survey of spiking neural network hardware concludes that no single technology currently dominates, and that hybrid architectures are the most promising route to complex deep spiking networks.

desk verdict A broad but uneven neuromorphic hardware survey: useful map, overclaimed hybrid conclusion, and a few fixable factual slips. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17926 v1 pith:LA63EZCN submitted 2024-12-23 cs.NE cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con

Andrey E. Schegolev , Marina V. Bastrakova , Michael A. Sergeev , Anastasia A. Maksimovskaya , Nikolay V. Klenov , Igor I. Soloviev This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.NEcond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con
keywords spikingneuralnetworksneuromorphichardwarebio-inspiredcomputingCMOScircuitsmemristivecrossbarssuperconductingelectronicsopticalsystemshybridarchitectures
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Spiking neural networks mimic the way biological neurons communicate with short voltage pulses, and this survey asks which hardware—semiconductor CMOS, memristive, superconducting, or optical—can best bring them to life. Its central conclusion is that no single approach currently has overwhelming advantages, and the field's decisive direction may not yet have been found. The authors argue that hybrid approaches, which combine the strengths of different physical platforms, can already deliver success in building complex deep spiking neuromorphic networks. The stakes are practical: the physical substrate determines energy efficiency, the fidelity of neural-tissue simulation, and the ease of processing, storing, and transmitting information for applications such as brain-computer interfaces, prosthetics, and robotic control.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a cross-technology comparison built on the biological functions a spiking network must implement: the soma (threshold and spike generation), the axon (signal transmission), the synapse (weighted, plastic connections), and learning. For each function the paper maps a physical mechanism—transistor energy barriers standing in for ion channels, memristor ionic dynamics for synapses and neurons, Josephson-junction flux quanta and superconducting nanowire hotspot switching for spikes, and laser or phase-change photonic elements for optical spikes—and compares how faithfully and efficiently that mechanism reproduces neural dynamics. This function-to-substrate mapping is what lets the survey conclude that strengths and weaknesses are distributed across platforms rather than concentrated in one.

What would settle it

Measure the total energy, latency, and accuracy of a published hybrid superconducting-optoelectronic network against the best single-platform CMOS or memristive system on the same task, counting all conversion, cooling, and packaging costs; if the single-platform system wins on both energy and accuracy, the hybrid recommendation loses its empirical support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the survey's own terms, the discovery is a comparative verdict: after weighing semiconductor, memristive, superconducting, and optical implementations against the requirements of bio-inspired spiking networks—biosimilarity, speed, energy efficiency, scalability, and learning—no single element base wins outright. CMOS is mature but struggles with dense synaptic wiring and high power; memristive devices imitate ionic neural behavior compactly but suffer device-to-device variation and cannot yet form a fully memristive processor; superconducting circuits offer extremely fast, low-energy spike dynamics but have low integration density and difficult memory implementation; optical systems transmit at very high bandwidth but lack efficient nonlinearity and need conversion overhead. The authors therefore conclude that the necessary direction of the field may not yet have been found, and that hybrid designs—for instance superconducting circuits coupled with light-based signal transmission—are the most promising path to complex deep spiking networks.

Load-bearing premise

The recommendation rests on the assumption that the overhead of joining different platforms—conversion losses, packaging, cryogenic interfaces—does not eat up the advantages each platform brings.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Investment in neuromorphic hardware should stay diversified rather than bet on a single technology, since each platform currently wins on some axes and loses on others.
  • The interfaces between platforms—optical-to-electrical conversion, analogue-to-digital conversion, cryogenic-to-room-temperature links—become first-class design problems on par with the devices themselves.
  • Fully memristive neuromorphic processors are not yet realistic; memristors will function as a complement to semiconductor circuitry for the foreseeable future.
  • Deep spiking networks of high complexity are more likely to emerge from combining substrates, such as superconducting spike generation with optical interconnect and semiconductor control, than from pushing one substrate alone.
  • The physical substrate is not a neutral implementation detail: its internal dynamics determine how biosimilar, how energy-efficient, and how scalable a spiking network can be.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: if the hybrid thesis is right, the field's next bottleneck is interface engineering, and benchmarking should report end-to-end system energy including conversion and cooling, not just per-device or per-spike figures.
  • Editorial extension: the same logic suggests a modular design rule—choose the best substrate for each neural function, for instance photonics for high-bandwidth interconnect, memristive crossbars for dense synaptic memory, superconducting elements for ultra-low-energy spikes, and CMOS for control—and then optimize the boundaries between them.
  • Editorial extension: a testable consequence is that a well-engineered single-platform system should not be able to beat a comparable hybrid on both energy and accuracy at scale; a controlled head-to-head comparison would sharpen or overturn the paper's conclusion.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper is a broad survey of hardware implementations of bio-inspired spiking neural networks, organized into three technological domains: CMOS/memristive, superconducting, and optical. It opens with a review of neuron models (Hodgkin-Huxley, Izhikevich, leaky integrate-and-fire), spike coding schemes, and training algorithms, then surveys representative systems in each domain, including TrueNorth, SpiNNaker, Neurogrid, NorthPole, Loihi, memristive crossbars, Josephson-junction neurons, superconducting nanowires, phase-change photonic neurons, and VCSEL-based spiking neurons. The concluding section argues that no single platform currently has overwhelming advantages, that the field's decisive direction may not yet have been found, and that hybrid approaches can 'with certainty' provide some success in building complex deep spiking neuromorphic networks.

Significance. If the survey's conclusions are accepted, the main practical implication is that hardware investment should remain diversified across CMOS, memristive, superconducting, and optical technologies, and that interfaces between platforms should be treated as a first-class design problem. The paper's strength is its breadth: it collects and contrasts a large number of independently developed systems, and it includes concrete energy-efficiency figures (e.g., TrueNorth versus SpiNNaker versus GPU, Neurogrid's 120 pJ versus 210 nJ per synaptic activation). The qualitative claim that no single platform dominates is defensible on the basis of the surveyed material. However, the forward-looking claim about hybrids is not supported by the review's own evidence: the cited hybrid superconducting-optoelectronic works are largely design studies from one group, and Section V explicitly lists serious interface costs that are never quantified in the discussion. The 'certainty' claim therefore goes beyond what the survey establishes.

major comments (1)
  1. [VI. Discussion and Conclusion] The final conclusion states that 'we can already say with certainty that the hybrid approach can provide some success in the formation of complex deep spiking neuromorphic networks.' This assertion is not supported by the body of the review. The only quantitative evidence for hybrid superconducting-optoelectronic systems (Refs. 172-175) concerns theoretical designs and small prototypes from a single group, and the manuscript gives no energy or latency budget for the necessary conversions (electrical-optical, cryogenic, analogue-digital) or for packaging. Section V itself notes that hybrid photonic-electronic architectures 'require the use of high-speed photodetectors and analogue-to-digital converters' and are 'complicated by high losses and packaging costs'. Without quantifying these overheads or comparing a hybrid system against a well-engineered single-platform system on a common benchmark, the claim of 'certainty' is an extrapolation. I recommend either removing 'with certainty' and presenting the hybrid direction as a plausible but unproven conjecture, or adding an end-to-end cost analysis that supports the claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [III.B.1] The text claims TrueNorth was 'the first hardware implementation of the idea of neuromorphic computing' and 'the first neuromorphic chip', yet the same subsection cites SpiNNaker (2012) and Neurogrid (2014) as earlier projects; this is a factual inconsistency in a survey and should be corrected to something like 'the first million-neuron CMOS implementation'.
  2. [III.B.1] The energy-efficiency figures have unit errors: '6100 – 7350F P S' should read '6100–7350 FPS/W', and '360 − −1420 F P S/W' contains a typo with a double minus sign.
  3. [II.A.2] Equation (2) gives the coefficient 104 in the membrane potential equation, but the text immediately after says 'The combination 0.04v^2 + 5v + 140 provides scaling...' The standard Izhikevich model uses 140; the equation and text should be made consistent.
  4. [V.B] The statement that VCSEL-based neurons require continuous power supply so that 'the advantages of energy efficiency in such systems are negated' sits in tension with the earlier claim that VCSELs provide 'sufficiently low power consumption for nonlinear conversion on the order of 10 fJ'; the distinction between switching energy and static power should be clarified.
  5. [VI] The claim that 'hybrid approaches are so popular at the moment' would benefit from a citation or a quantitative statement, since the review does not systematically count hybrid publications.
  6. [II.C.1] The statement that ANN-to-SNN conversion 'is doing an approximation of activation, negatively affecting the performance of a SNN' lacks a reference; adding a comparative benchmark would make the claim verifiable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the survey's conclusions rest on external literature, not on fitted parameters or author-derived predictions.

full rationale

This paper is a literature survey, not a derivation chain. Its central conclusion — that no single platform currently dominates and that hybrid superconducting/optoelectronic/CMOS approaches are promising — is anchored in a broad external literature including TrueNorth, SpiNNaker, Loihi, VCSELs, phase-change materials, and the Shainline et al. superconducting optoelectronic loop-neuron line (Refs. 172-175). There is no equation in which an output equals an input by construction, no fitted value renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' prior work. The authors do cite their own earlier superconducting neuron and qubit work (Refs. 105, 106, 112, 176), but these are descriptive contributions to the review, not load-bearing supports for the hybrid recommendation; Refs. 172-175 that carry that recommendation are external. The paper's own Section V caveats about high losses, packaging costs, and pre/post-processing in hybrid photonic-electronic systems make the Section VI 'certainty' claim appear under-supported, but that is an evidence-quality concern, not circularity. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's text, so per the hard rules the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on no fitted parameters and no new entities. It depends instead on the validity of cited hardware demonstrations and on the interpretive assumption that the survey's selection and comparison criteria are representative.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Hardware implementation is the decisive factor in achieving bio-similarity and efficiency in spiking neural networks.
    Stated in the abstract and Introduction as the motivation for the survey; it frames which evidence is considered and is not proven by the review.
  • domain assumption Performance and energy numbers reported in the cited primary literature are accurate.
    Section III.B compares TrueNorth, SpiNNaker, Neurogrid, NorthPole, and Loihi using published FPS/W and energy-per-spike figures without independent verification.
  • domain assumption Comparing isolated device and demonstration results across platforms is a valid way to judge the field.
    The survey juxtaposes results from different years, process nodes, and tasks such as MNIST, coincidence detection, and LASSO as if they are directly comparable; this comparability is assumed, not demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Contemporary implementations of spiking bio-inspired neural networks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LA63EZCN

@misc{pith2026241217926,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Contemporary implementations of spiking bio-inspired neural networks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LA63EZCN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17926}
}
read the original abstract

The extensive development of the field of spiking neural networks has led to many areas of research that have a direct impact on people's lives. As the most bio-similar of all neural networks, spiking neural networks not only allow the solution of recognition and clustering problems (including dynamics), but also contribute to the growing knowledge of the human nervous system. Our analysis has shown that the hardware implementation is of great importance, since the specifics of the physical processes in the network cells affect their ability to simulate the neural activity of living neural tissue, the efficiency of certain stages of information processing, storage and transmission. This survey reviews existing hardware neuromorphic implementations of bio-inspired spiking networks in the "semiconductor", "superconductor" and "optical" domains. Special attention is given to the possibility of effective "hybrids" of different approaches

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.17926 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The number of publications histograms based on data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. [22] Electrical analog of the Hodgkin-Huxley model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. [18] a - Illustration of a biological neuron and its [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (19 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. [30]SNN architecture for the XOR problem solving. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Semiconductor solutions for realising bio-inspired [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Voltage-Dependent Silicon Ion Channel Model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a) Integrate-and-fire neuron circuit with the illus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Illustration of the cortical neuron circuit, based on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Experimental firing patterns obtained from the fab [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Images of some CMOS spiking neural network [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (a) Loihi chip plot and (b) Intel’s the second [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. (a) Microphotograph of the fully memristive spik [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. a – The SEM top view image of the 20 memris [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. (a) A sketch explaining the concept of the Joseph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Schematic representation of the complete RSFQ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Schematics of an advanced neuron proposed by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. (a) Equivalent circuit of a memristive Josephson [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. A high-level block diagram of the Neuron Core as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_19.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21. Illustration of the concept of charge-flux duality: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22. A QPSJ-based integrate and fire neuron circuit with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23. (a) Schematic of a bipolar integrate-and-fire neu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: FIG. 24. (a) Schematic diagram showing the basic working [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_24.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

181 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This is a clocked decision element that decides to let a single flux quantum pass in response to a current driven into source 1 in figure 16

    Soma – Josephson Comparator (JC). This is a clocked decision element that decides to let a single flux quantum pass in response to a current driven into source 1 in figure 16. The decision function of the comparator is similar to the activation of a neu- ron in response to a current stimulus. Note that the Josephson comparator has been widely used as a no...

  2. [2]

    The transmission of the action potential originating from the Soma to adjacent neurons can be carried out by the Josephson Transmission Line (JTL)

    Axon – Josephson Transmission Line (JTL). The transmission of the action potential originating from the Soma to adjacent neurons can be carried out by the Josephson Transmission Line (JTL). A magnetic flux quantum can move along the JTL with a short delay and low energy dissipation, and 18 its passage through the Josephson junction is ac- companied by the...

  3. [3]

    flux-tunelling

    Synapse – Adaptive Josephson Transmission Line (AJTL). Synapses exert an inhibitory or excitatory influence on the postsynaptic neuron with respect to the past activity of the pre- and post-synaptic neuron. While memory is still difficult to imple- ment in RSFQ technology, Feldhoff et al. [108] havedesignedashort-termadaptationelementthat sets a connectio...

    2018

  4. [4]

    Taherkhani, A

    A. Taherkhani, A. Belatreche, Y. Li, G. Cosma, L. P. Maguire, and T. M. McGinnity, A review of learning in biologically plausible spiking neural networks, Neural Networks 122, 253 (2020)

    2020

  5. [5]

    Abramson, J

    J. Abramson, J. Adler, J. Dunger, R. Evans, T. Green, A. Pritzel, O. Ronneberger, L. Willmore, A. J. Bal- lard, J. Bambrick,et al., Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with alphafold 3, Nature , 1 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    J. J. Hopfield, Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities, Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 79(8), 2554 (1982)

    1982

  7. [7]

    Prieto, B

    A. Prieto, B. Prieto, E. M. Ortigosa, E. Ros, F. Pelayo, J. Ortega, and I. Rojas, Neural networks: An overview of early research, current frameworks and new chal- 25 lenges, Neurocomputing 214, 242 (2016)

    2016

  8. [8]

    Falotico, L

    E. Falotico, L. Vannucci, A. Ambrosano, U. Albanese, S. Ulbrich, J. C. Vasquez Tieck, G. Hinkel, J. Kaiser, I. Peric, O. Denninger, et al., Connecting artificial brains to robots in a comprehensive simulation frame- work: the neurorobotics platform, Frontiers in neuro- robotics 11, 2 (2017)

    2017

Show all 181 references
  1. [9]

    Markram, The blue brain project, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7, 153 (2006)

    H. Markram, The blue brain project, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 7, 153 (2006)

    2006

  2. [10]

    Van Der Smagt, M

    P. Van Der Smagt, M. A. Arbib, and G. Metta, Neuro- robotics: From vision to action, Springer Handbook of Robotics , 2069 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    M. Iosa, G. Morone, A. Cherubini, and S. Paolucci, The three laws of neurorobotics: a review on what neu- rorehabilitation robots should do for patients and clini- cians, Journal of medical and biological engineering36, 1 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    Liang, Y

    Q. Liang, Y. Zeng, and B. Xu, Temporal-sequential learning with a brain-inspired spiking neural network and its application to musical memory, Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 14, 51 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Raspopovic, Neurorobotics for neurorehabilitation, Science 373, 634 (2021)

    S. Raspopovic, Neurorobotics for neurorehabilitation, Science 373, 634 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    N. K. Kasabov, Neucube: A spiking neural network architecture for mapping, learning and understanding of spatio-temporal brain data, Neural Networks52, 62 (2014)

    2014

  7. [15]

    Yamazaki, V.-K

    K. Yamazaki, V.-K. Vo-Ho, D. Bulsara, and N. Le, Spik- ing neural networks and their applications: A review, Brain Sciences 12, 863 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    S. N. Flesher, J. E. Downey, J. M. Weiss, C. L. Hughes, A. J. Herrera, E. C. Tyler-Kabara, M. L. Boninger, J. L. Collinger, and R. A. Gaunt, A brain-computer interface that evokes tactile sensations improves robotic arm con- trol, Science 372, 831 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    B. He, H. Yuan, J. Meng, and S. Gao, Brain–computer interfaces, Neural engineering , 131 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    X. Gao, Y. Wang, X. Chen, and S. Gao, Interface, inter- action, and intelligence in generalized brain–computer interfaces, Trends in cognitive sciences25, 671 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Yadav, S

    D. Yadav, S. Yadav, and K. Veer, A comprehensive as- sessment of brain computer interfaces: Recent trends and challenges, Journal of Neuroscience Methods346, 108918 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Malcom and J

    K. Malcom and J. Casco-Rodriguez, A com- prehensive review of spiking neural networks: Interpretation, optimization, efficiency, and best practices, arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.10780 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.10780 (2023)

    2023 doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    Bonci, S

    A. Bonci, S. Fiori, H. Higashi, T. Tanaka, and F. Ver- dini, An introductory tutorial on brain–computer inter- faces and their applications, Electronics10, 560 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Zheng and P

    N. Zheng and P. Mazumder, Operational Principles and Learning in Spiking Neural Networks(Wiley-IEEE Press, 2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    A. L. Hodgkin and A. F. Huxley, A quantitative descrip- tion of membrane current and its application to conduc- tion and excitation in nerve, The Journal of physiology 117, 500 (1952)

    1952

  16. [24]

    Izhikevich, Dynamical systems in neuro- science: The geometry of excitability and bursting, Mathematics, Computer Science http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2526.001.0001 (2006)

    E. Izhikevich, Dynamical systems in neuro- science: The geometry of excitability and bursting, Mathematics, Computer Science http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2526.001.0001 (2006)

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    H¨ ausser, The hodgkin-huxley theory of the action potential, Nature neuroscience3, 1165 (2000)

    M. H¨ ausser, The hodgkin-huxley theory of the action potential, Nature neuroscience3, 1165 (2000)

    2000

  18. [26]

    Thanapitak,Bionics Chemical Synapse, Ph.D

    S. Thanapitak,Bionics Chemical Synapse, Ph.D. thesis (2012)

    2012

  19. [27]

    E. M. Izhikevich, Simple model of spiking neu- rons, IEEE Transactions on neural networks 14, https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2003.820440 (2003)

    2003

  20. [28]

    B. Yin, F. Corradi, and S. M. Boht´ e, Accurate online training of dynamical spiking neural networks through forward propagation through time, Nature Machine In- telligence , 1 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Y. Wu, L. Deng, G. Li, J. Zhu, and L. Shi, Spatio-temporal backpropagation for training high- performance spiking neural networks, Frontiers in neu- roscience 12, 331 (2018)

    2018

  22. [30]

    J. K. Eshraghian, M. Ward, E. O. Neftci, X. Wang, G. Lenz, G. Dwivedi, M. Bennamoun, D. S. Jeong, and W. D. Lu, Training spiking neural networks us- ing lessons from deep learning, Proceedings of the IEEE 10.1109/jproc.2023.3308088 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    J. A. P´ erez-Carrasco, B. Zhao, C. Serrano, B. Acha, T. Serrano-Gotarredona, S. Chen, and B. Linares- Barranco, Mapping from frame-driven to frame-free event-driven vision systems by low-rate rate coding and coincidence processing–application to feedforward con- vnets, IEEE t...

    2013

  24. [32]

    P. A. Merolla, J. V. Arthur, R. Alvarez-Icaza, A. S. Cas- sidy, J. Sawada, F. Akopyan, B. L. Jackson, N. Imam, C. Guo, Y. Nakamura,et al., A million spiking-neuron integrated circuit with a scalable communication net- work and interface, Science345, 668 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    K. Irie, A. Gopalakrishnan, and J. Schmidhuber, Exploring the promise and limits of real-time re- current learning, arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.19044 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.19044 (2023)

    2023 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    Reljan-Delaney and J

    M. Reljan-Delaney and J. Wall, Solving the linearly in- separable xor problem with spiking neural networks, in 2017 Computing Conference(IEEE, 2017) pp. 701–705

    2017

  27. [35]

    Indiveri, B

    G. Indiveri, B. Linares-Barranco, T. J. Hamilton, A. v. Schaik, R. Etienne-Cummings, T. Delbruck, S.-C. Liu, P. Dudek, P. H¨ afliger, S. Renaud,et al., Neuromorphic silicon neuron circuits, Frontiers in neuroscience5, 73 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    K. M. Hynna and K. Boahen, Thermodynamically equivalent silicon models of voltage-dependent ion chan- nels, Neural computation19, 327 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    Akopyan, J

    F. Akopyan, J. Sawada, A. Cassidy, R. Alvarez-Icaza, J. Arthur, P. Merolla, N. Imam, Y. Nakamura, P. Datta, G.-J. Nam, et al., Truenorth: Design and tool flow of a 65 mw 1 million neuron programmable neurosynaptic chip, IEEE transactions on computer-aided design of integrated ...

    2015

  30. [38]

    B. V. Benjamin, P. Gao, E. McQuinn, S. Choudhary, A. R. Chandrasekaran, J.-M. Bussat, R. Alvarez-Icaza, J. V. Arthur, P. A. Merolla, and K. Boahen, Neurogrid: A mixed-analog-digital multichip system for large-scale neural simulations, Proceedings of the IEEE102, 699 (2014)

    2014

  31. [39]

    L. A. Camu˜ nas-Mesa, B. Linares-Barranco, and T. Serrano-Gotarredona, Neuromorphic spiking neural networks and their memristor-cmos hardware imple- mentations, Materials 12, 2745 (2019). 26

    2019

  32. [40]

    Sawada, F

    J. Sawada, F. Akopyan, A. S. Cassidy, B. Taba, M. V. Debole, P. Datta, R. Alvarez-Icaza, A. Amir, J. V. Arthur, A. Andreopoulos, et al., Truenorth ecosystem for brain-inspired computing: scalable systems, soft- ware, and applications, in SC’16: Proceedings of the International...

    2016

  33. [41]

    Y.-S. Park, S. Woo, D. Lim, K. Cho, and S. Kim, Integrate-and-fire neuron circuit without external bias voltages, Frontiers in neuroscience15, 644604 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    J. H. Wijekoon and P. Dudek, Compact silicon neu- ron circuit with spiking and bursting behaviour, Neural Networks 21, 524 (2008)

    2008

  35. [43]

    S. B. Furber, D. R. Lester, L. A. Plana, J. D. Garside, E. Painkras, S. Temple, and A. D. Brown, Overview of the spinnaker system architecture, IEEE transactions on computers 62, 2454 (2012)

    2012

  36. [44]

    Painkras, L

    E. Painkras, L. A. Plana, J. Garside, S. Temple, F. Galluppi, C. Patterson, D. R. Lester, A. D. Brown, and S. B. Furber, Spinnaker: A 1-w 18-core system-on- chip for massively-parallel neural network simulation, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits48, 1943 (2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    Stromatias, D

    E. Stromatias, D. Neil, F. Galluppi, M. Pfeiffer, S.-C. Liu,andS.Furber,Scalableenergy-efficient, low-latency implementations of trained spiking deep belief networks on spinnaker, in2015 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN)(IEEE, 2015) pp. 1–8

    2015

  38. [46]

    B. D. Learning, A performance and power analysis, NVidia Whitepaper, Nov (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    C. Mayr, S. Hoeppner, and S. Furber, Spinnaker 2: A 10 million core processor system for brain simulation and machine learning, arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.02385 10.3233/978-1-61499-949-2-277 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    B. V. Benjamin, N. A. Steinmetz, N. N. Oza, J. J. Aguayo, and K. Boahen, Neurogrid simulates cortical cell-types, active dendrites, and top-down attention, Neuromorphic Computing and Engineering 1, 013001 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Stromatias, F

    E. Stromatias, F. Galluppi, C. Patterson, and S. Furber, Power analysis of large-scale, real-time neural networks on spinnaker, inThe 2013 international joint conference on neural networks (IJCNN)(IEEE, 2013) pp. 1–8

    2013

  42. [50]

    H¨ oppner, Y

    S. H¨ oppner, Y. Yan, A. Dixius, S. Scholze, J. Partzsch, M. Stolba, F. Kelber, B. Vogginger, F. Neum¨ arker, G. Ellguth, et al. , The spinnaker 2 processing element architecture for hybrid digital neuromor- phic computing, arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.08392 https://doi.org/10.48...

    2021 doi arXiv

  43. [51]

    Merolla, J

    P. Merolla, J. Arthur, R. Alvarez, J.-M. Bussat, and K. Boahen, A multicast tree router for multichip neu- romorphic systems, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers61, 820 (2013)

    2013

  44. [52]

    C.-K. Lin, A. Wild, G. N. Chinya, Y. Cao, M. Davies, D. M. Lavery, and H. Wang, Programming spiking neu- ral networks on intel’s loihi, Computer51, 52 (2018)

    2018

  45. [53]

    J. C. Knight and T. Nowotny, Larger gpu-accelerated brain simulations with procedural connectivity, Nature Computational Science 1, 136 (2021)

    2021

  46. [54]

    D. S. Modha, F. Akopyan, A. Andreopoulos, R. Ap- puswamy, J. V. Arthur, A. S. Cassidy, P. Datta, M. V. DeBole, S. K. Esser, C. O. Otero,et al., Neural infer- ence at the frontier of energy, space, and time, Science 382, 329 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Davies, N

    M. Davies, N. Srinivasa, T.-H. Lin, G. Chinya, Y. Cao, S. H. Choday, G. Dimou, P. Joshi, N. Imam, S. Jain, et al., Loihi: A neuromorphic manycore processor with on-chip learning, Ieee Micro38, 82 (2018)

    2018

  48. [56]

    R. B. Uluda˘ g, S. ¸ Ca˘ gda¸ s, Y. S.˙I¸ sler, N. S. ¸ Seng¨ or, and I. Akturk, Bio-realistic neural net- work implementation on loihi 2 with izhike- vich neurons, arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.11844 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.11844 (2023)

    2023 doi arXiv

  49. [57]

    Davieset al., Taking neuromorphic computing to the next level with loihi2, Intel Labs’ Loihi2, 1 (2021)

    M. Davieset al., Taking neuromorphic computing to the next level with loihi2, Intel Labs’ Loihi2, 1 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    S. B. Shrestha, J. Timcheck, P. Frady, L. Campos- Macias, and M. Davies, Efficient video and audio pro- cessing with loihi 2, in ICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)(IEEE, 2024) pp. 13481–13485

    2024

  51. [59]

    Parpart, S

    G. Parpart, S. Risbud, G. Kenyon, and Y. Watkins, Implementing and benchmarking the locally competi- tive algorithm on the loihi 2 neuromorphic processor, in Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Neuromorphic Systems(2023) pp. 1–6

    2023

  52. [60]

    Victor, Memristive devices for neuromorphic appli- cations: Comparative analysis, BioNanoScience10, 834 (2020)

    E. Victor, Memristive devices for neuromorphic appli- cations: Comparative analysis, BioNanoScience10, 834 (2020)

    2020

  53. [61]

    Chua, Memristor-the missing circuit element, IEEE Transactions on Circuit Theory18, 507 (1971)

    L. Chua, Memristor-the missing circuit element, IEEE Transactions on Circuit Theory18, 507 (1971)

    1971

  54. [62]

    D. B. Strukov, G. S. Snider, D. R. Stewart, and R. S. Williams, The missing memristor found, Nature453, 80 (2008)

    2008

  55. [63]

    Y. Li, Z. Wang, R. Midya, Q. Xia, and J. J. Yang, Review of memristor devices in neuromorphic comput- ing: materials sciences and device challenges, Journal of Physics D Applied Physics51, 503002 (2018)

    2018

  56. [64]

    D. B. Strukov and R. S. Williams, Four-dimensional address topology for circuits with stacked mul- tilayer crossbar arrays, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 106, 20155 (2009), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.0906949106

    2009 doi

  57. [65]

    S. H. Lee, X. Zhu, and W. D. Lu, Nanoscale resistive switching devices for memory and computing applica- tions, Nano Res.13, 1228–1243 (2020)

    2020

  58. [66]

    A. N. Mikhaylov, E. G. Gryaznov, M. N. Koryazhk- ina, I. A. Bordanov, S. A. Shchanikov, O. A. Telmi- nov, and V. B. Kazantsev, Neuromorphic computing based on cmos-integrated memristive arrays: Current state and perspectives, Supercomputing Frontiers and Innovations 10, 77–103 (2023)

    2023

  59. [67]

    Z. Wang, S. Joshi, S. Savel’Ev, W. Song, R. Midya, Y. Li, M. Rao, P. Yan, S. Asapu, Y. Zhuo, et al., Fully memristive neural networks for pattern classifi- cation with unsupervised learning, Nature Electronics 1, 137 (2018)

    2018

  60. [68]

    Strukov, Self-adaptive spike-time-dependent plasticity of metal-oxide memristors, Scientific reports 6, 21331 (2016)

    M.Prezioso, F.MerrikhBayat, B.Hoskins, K.Likharev, and D. Strukov, Self-adaptive spike-time-dependent plasticity of metal-oxide memristors, Scientific reports 6, 21331 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Sung Hyun, C

    J. Sung Hyun, C. Ting, E. Idongesit, B. Bhavitavya B., M. Pinaki, and L. Wei, Nanoscale memristor device as synapse in neuromorphic systems, Nano Lett.10, 1297 (2010)

    2010

  62. [70]

    K. K. Likharev, Crossnets: Neuromorphic hybrid cmos/nanoelectronic networks, Science of Advanced Materials 3, 322 (2011)

    2011

  63. [71]

    Prezioso, F

    M. Prezioso, F. Merrikh-Bayat, B. D. Hoskins, G. C. 27 Adam, K. K. Likharev, and D. B. Strukov, Training and operation of an integrated neuromorphic network based on metal-oxide memristors, Nature521, 61 (2015)

    2015

  64. [72]

    Tzouvadaki, P

    I. Tzouvadaki, P. Gkoupidenis, S. Vassanelli, S. Wang, and T. Prodromakis, Interfacing biology and electron- ics with memristive materials, Advanced Materials35, 2210035 (2023)

    2023

  65. [73]

    Papandroulidakis, I

    G. Papandroulidakis, I. Vourkas, A. Abusleme, G. C. Sirakoulis, and A. Rubio, Crossbar-based memristive logic-in-memory architecture, IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology 16, 491 (2017)

    2017

  66. [74]

    Zhang, A

    X. Zhang, A. Huang, Q. Hu, Z. Xiao, and P. K. Chu, Neuromorphic computing with memristor cross- bar, physica status solidi (a)215, 1700875 (2018)

    2018

  67. [75]

    Xia and J

    Q. Xia and J. J. Yang, Memristive crossbar arrays for brain-inspired computing, Nature materials18, 309 (2019)

    2019

  68. [76]

    Y. V. Pershin and V. A. Slipko, Dynamical attractors of memristors and their networks, Europhysics Letters 125, 20002 (2019)

    2019

  69. [77]

    La Barbera, D

    S. La Barbera, D. Vuillaume, and F. Alibart, Fila- mentary switching: synaptic plasticity through device volatility, ACS nano9, 941 (2015)

    2015

  70. [78]

    Zhang, W

    X. Zhang, W. Wang, Q. Liu, X. Zhao, J. Wei, R. Cao, Z. Yao, X. Zhu, F. Zhang, H. Lv,et al., An artificial neuron based on a threshold switching memristor, IEEE Electron Device Letters39, 308 (2017)

    2017

  71. [79]

    Q. Duan, Z. Jing, X. Zou, Y. Wang, K. Yang, T. Zhang, S. Wu, R. Huang, and Y. Yang, Spiking neurons with spatiotemporal dynamics and gain modulation for monolithically integrated memristive neural networks, Nature communications 11, 3399 (2020)

    2020

  72. [80]

    V. A. Demin, D. V. Nekhaev, I. A. Surazhevsky, K. E. Nikiruy, A. V. Emelyanov, and S. N. Nikolaev, Neces- saryconditionsforstdp-basedpatternrecognitionlearn- ing in a memristive spiking neural network, Neural Netw. 134, 64 (2021)

    2021

  73. [81]

    Carboni and D

    R. Carboni and D. Ielmini, Stochastic memory devices for security and computing, Adv. Electron. Mater.5, 1 (2019)

    2019

  74. [82]

    V. A. Makarov, S. A. Lobov, S. Shchanikov, A. Mikhaylov, and V. B. Kazantsev, Toward reflec- tive spiking neural networks exploiting memristive de- vices, Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 16, 10.3389/fncom.2022.859874 (2022)

    2022

  75. [83]

    Prezioso, M

    M. Prezioso, M. Mahmoodi, F. Bayat, H. Nili, H. Kim, A. Vincent, and D. Strukov, Spike-timing-dependent plasticity learning of coincidence detection with pas- sively integrated memristive circuits, Nat Commun.9, 10.1038/s41467-018-07757-y (2018)

    2018 doi

  76. [84]

    Z. F. Mainen and T. J. Sejnowski, Reliability of spike timing in neocortical neurons, Science268, 1503 (1995)

    1995

  77. [85]

    Amirsoleimani, F

    A. Amirsoleimani, F. Alibart, V. Yon, M. R. Xu, J.and Pazhouhandeh, S. Ecoffey, Y. Beilliard, R. Genov, and D. A. Drouin, In-memory vector- matrix multiplication in monolithic complementary metal–oxide–semiconductor-memristor integrated cir- cuits: designchoices, challenges, a...

    2020 doi

  78. [86]

    Sa¨ ıghi, C

    S. Sa¨ ıghi, C. G. Mayr, T. Serrano-Gotarredona, H. Schmidt, G. Lecerf, J. Tomas, J. Grollier, S. Boyn, A. F. Vincent, D. Querlioz,et al., Plasticity in mem- ristive devices for spiking neural networks, Frontiers in neuroscience 9, 123457 (2015)

    2015

  79. [87]

    W. R. Softky and C. Koch, The highly irregular firing of cortical cells is inconsistent with temporal integration of random epsps, Journal of neuroscience13, 334 (1993)

    1993

  80. [88]

    V. K. Semenov, E. B. Golden, and S. K. Tolpygo, Biosfq circuit family for neuromorphic computing: Bridging digital and analog domains of superconductor technolo- gies, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 10.1109/tasc.2023.3252495 (2023)

    2023

  81. [89]

    C. F. Stevens and A. M. Zador, Input synchrony and the irregular firing of cortical neurons, Nature neuroscience 1, 210 (1998)

    1998

  82. [90]

    Ishida, I

    K. Ishida, I. Byun, I. Nagaoka, K. Fukumitsu, M. Tanaka, S. Kawakami, T. Tanimoto, T. Ono, J. Kim, andK.Inoue,Superconductorcomputingforneuralnet- works, Ieee Micro41, 19 (2021)

    2021

  83. [91]

    V. K. Semenov, E. B. Golden, and S. K. Tolpygo, A new family of biosfq logic/memory cells, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity32, 1 (2021)

    2021

  84. [92]

    I. I. Soloviev, N. V. Klenov, S. V. Bakurskiy, M. Y. Kupriyanov, A. L. Gudkov, and A. S. Sidorenko, Be- yond moore’s technologies: operation principles of a su- perconductor alternative, Beilstein journal of nanotech- nology 8, 2689 (2017)

    2017

  85. [93]

    Q. P. Herr, A. Y. Herr, O. T. Oberg, and A. G. Ioannedis, Ultra-low-power superconductor logic, Ieee Access 6, 5128 (2011)

    2011

  86. [94]

    O. A. Mukhanov, Energy-efficient single flux quan- tum technology, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond21, 760 (2011)

    2011

  87. [95]

    Tanaka, M

    M. Tanaka, M. Ito, A. Kitayama, T. Kouketsu, and A. Fujimaki, 18-ghz, 4.0-aj/bit operation of ultra- low-energy rapid single-flux-quantum shift registers, J. Appl. Phys. 51, 053102 (2012)

    2012

  88. [96]

    P. W. Anderson and J. M. Rowell, Probable observa- tion of the josephson superconducting tunneling effect, Physical Review Letters10, 230 (1963)

    1963

  89. [97]

    V. K. Semenov, Y. A. Polyakov, and S. K. Tolpygo, Ac- biased shift registers as fabrication process benchmark circuits and flux trapping diagnostic tool, IEEE Trans- actions on Applied Superconductivity27, 1 (2017)

    2017

  90. [98]

    O. A. Mukhanov, Applied superconductivity: Hand- book on devices and applications (Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2015) Chap. Superconductor Digital Electronics, pp. 1–28

    2015

  91. [99]

    B.D.Josephson,Possibleneweffectsinsuperconductive tunnelling, Physics letters1, 251 (1962)

    1962

  92. [100]

    M. A. Castellanos-Beltran, D. I. Olaya, A. J. Sirois, P. D. Dresselhaus, S. P. Benz, and P. F. Hopkins, Stacked josephson junctions as inductors for single flux quantum circuits, IEEE Transactions on Applied Super- conductivity 29, 1 (2019)

    2019

  93. [101]

    S. K. Tolpygo, V. Bolkhovsky, D. E. Oates, R. Rastogi, S. Zarr, A. L. Day, T. J. Weir, A. Wynn, and L. M. Johnson, Superconductor electronics fabrication process with monx kinetic inductors and self-shunted josephson junctions, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.28, 1100212 (2018)

    2018

  94. [102]

    S. K. Tolpygo, E. B. Golden, T. J. Weir, and V.Bolkhovsky,Inductanceofsuperconductorintegrated circuit features with sizes down to 120 nm, Supercon- ductor Science and Technology34, 085005 (2021)

    2021

  95. [103]

    S. K. Tolpygo, R. Rastogi, T. Weir, E. B. Golden, and V. Bolkhovsky, Development of self-shunted josephson junctionsforaten-superconductor-layerfabricationpro- cess: Nb/nbnx/nb junctions, IEEE Transactions on Ap- 28 plied Superconductivity 34, 1 (2024)

    2024

  96. [104]

    Crotty, D

    P. Crotty, D. Schult, and K. Segall, Josephson junction simulation of neurons, Physical Review E 82, 011914 (2010)

    2010

  97. [105]

    Roditchev, C

    D. Roditchev, C. Brun, L. Serrier-Garcia, J. C. Cuevas, V. H. L. Bessa, M. V. Miloˇ sevi´ c, F. Debontridder, V. Stolyarov, and T. Cren, Direct observation of joseph- son vortex cores, Nature Physics11, 332 (2015)

    2015

  98. [106]

    V. S. Stolyarov, T. Cren, C. Brun, I. A. Golovchan- skiy, O. V. Skryabina, D. I. Kasatonov, M. M. Khapaev, M. Y. Kupriyanov, A. A. Golubov, and D. Roditchev, Expansion of a superconducting vortex core into a dif- fusive metal, Nature communications9, 1 (2018)

    2018

  99. [107]

    S. Y. Grebenchuk, R. A. Hovhannisyan, V. V. Dremov, A. G. Shishkin, V. I. Chichkov, A. A. Golubov, D. Roditchev, V. M. Krasnov, and V. S. Stolyarov, Ob- servation of interacting josephson vortex chains by mag- netic force microscopy, Phys. Rev. Research2, 023105 (2020)

    2020

  100. [108]

    F.FeldhoffandH.Toepfer,Niobiumneuron: Rsfqbased bio-inspired circuit, IEEE Transactions on Applied Su- perconductivity 31, 1 (2021)

    2021

  101. [109]

    O. V. Skryabina, A. E. Schegolev, N. V. Klenov, S. V. Bakurskiy, A.G.Shishkin, S.V.Sotnichuk, K.S.Napol- skii, I. A. Nazhestkin, I. I. Soloviev, M. Y. Kupriyanov, et al., Superconducting bio-inspired au-nanowire-based neurons, Nanomaterials 12, 1671 (2022)

    2022

  102. [110]

    A. E. Schegolev, N. V. Klenov, G. I. Gubochkin, M. Y. Kupriyanov, and I. I. Soloviev, Bio-inspired design of superconducting spiking neuron and synapse, Nanoma- terials 13, 2101 (2023)

    2023

  103. [111]

    Karimov, V

    T. Karimov, V. Ostrovskii, V. Rybin, O. Druzhina, G. Kolev, and D. Butusov, Magnetic flux sensor based on spiking neurons with josephson junctions, Sensors 24, 2367 (2024)

    2024

  104. [112]

    A. E. Schegolev, N. V. Klenov, S. V. Bakurskiy, I. I. Soloviev, M. Y. Kupriyanov, M. V. Tereshonok, and A. S. Sidorenko, Tunable superconducting neurons for networks based on radial basis functions, Beilstein Jour- nal of Nanotechnology13, 444 (2022)

    2022

  105. [113]

    Harada and E

    Y. Harada and E. Goto, Artificial neural network cir- cuitswithjosephsondevices,IEEEtransactionsonmag- netics 27, 2863 (1991)

    1991

  106. [114]

    Yamanashi, K

    Y. Yamanashi, K. Umeda, and N. Yoshikawa, Pseudo sigmoid function generator for a superconductive neural network, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconduc- tivity 23, 1701004 (2012)

    2012

  107. [115]

    Feldhoff and H

    F. Feldhoff and H. Toepfer, Short-and long-term state switching in the superconducting niobium neuron plas- ticity, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 10.1109/tasc.2024.3355876 (2024)

    2024

  108. [116]

    F. Wu, H. Meng, and J. Ma, Reproduced neuron-like excitability and bursting synchronization of memristive josephson junctions loaded inductor, Neural Networks 169, 607 (2024)

    2024

  109. [117]

    M. A. Karamuftuoglu, B. Z. Ucpinar, A. Fayyazi, S. Razmkhah, M. Kamal, and M. Pe- dram, Scalable superconductor neuron with ternary synaptic connections for ultra-fast snn hardware, arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16384 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.16384 (2024)

    2024 doi arXiv

  110. [118]

    B. Z. Ucpinar, M. A. Karamuftuoglu, S. Razmkhah, and M. Pedram, An on-chip trainable neuron circuit for sfq- based spiking neural networks, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 10.1109/tasc.2024.3359164 (2024)

    2024

  111. [119]

    M. L. Schneider, C. A. Donnelly, and S. E. Russek, Tutorial: High-speed low-power neu- romorphic systems based on magnetic Joseph- son junctions, Journal of Applied Physics 124, 161102 (2018), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/1.5042425/15217796/161102_1_online.pdf

    2018 doi

  112. [120]

    Toomey, K

    E. Toomey, K. Segall, and K. K. Berggren, Design of a power efficient artificial neuron using superconducting nanowires, Frontiers in neuroscience13, 481146 (2019)

    2019

  113. [121]

    Tschirhart and K

    P. Tschirhart and K. Segall, Brainfreeze: Expanding the capabilities of neuromorphic systems using mixed-signal superconducting electronics, Frontiers in Neuroscience 15, 10.3389/fnins.2021.750748 (2021)

    2021

  114. [122]

    M. L. Schneider and K. Segall, Fan-out and fan-in properties of superconducting neuromor- phic circuits, Journal of Applied Physics 128, 214903 (2020), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/5.0025168/15256290/214903_1_online.pdf

    2020 doi

  115. [123]

    Toomey, Q.-Y

    E. Toomey, Q.-Y. Zhao, A. N. McCaughan, and K. K. Berggren, Frequency pulling and mixing of relaxation oscillations in superconducting nanowires, Physical Re- view Applied 9, 064021 (2018)

    2018

  116. [124]

    Cheng, U

    R. Cheng, U. S. Goteti, and M. C. Hamilton, Spiking neuron circuits using superconducting quantum phase- slip junctions, Journal of Applied Physics124, 152126 (2018)

    2018

  117. [125]

    Toomey, K

    E. Toomey, K. Segall, M. Castellani, M. Colan- gelo, N. Lynch, and K. K. Berggren, Superconducting nanowirespikingelementforneuralnetworks,NanoLet- ters 20, 8059 (2020)

    2020

  118. [126]

    Astafiev, L

    O. Astafiev, L. Ioffe, S. Kafanov, Y. A. Pashkin, K. Y. Arutyunov, D. Shahar, O. Cohen, and J. S. Tsai, Co- herent quantum phase slip, Nature484, 355 (2012)

    2012

  119. [127]

    Cheng, U

    R. Cheng, U. S. Goteti, H. Walker, K. M. Krause, L. Oeding, and M. C. Hamilton, Toward learning in neu- romorphic circuits based on quantum phase slip junc- tions, Frontiers in Neuroscience15, 765883 (2021)

    2021

  120. [128]

    A. N. Tait, T. Ferreira de Lima, M. A. Nahmias, H. B. Miller, H.-T. Peng, B. J. Shastri, and P. R. Prucnal, Silicon photonic modulator neuron, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 064043 (2019)

    2019

  121. [129]

    J. Liu, Q. Wu, X. Sui, C. Qian, G. Guohua, W. Lip- ing, and L. Shengcai, Research progress in optical neural networks: theory, applications and developments, Pho- toniX 2, 5 (2021)

    2021

  122. [130]

    Feldmann, N

    J. Feldmann, N. Youngblood, M. Karpov, H. Gehring, X. Li, M. Stappers, M. L. Gallo, X. Fu, A. Lukashchuk, A.S.Raja, J.Liu, C.D.Wright, A.Sebastian, T.J.Kip- penberg, W. H. P. Pernice, and H. Bhaskaran, Parallel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tensor core,...

    2021

  123. [131]

    A. Jha, C. Huang, and P. R. Prucnal, Reconfigurable all-optical nonlinear activation functions, in2020 IEEE Photonics Conference (IPC)(2020) pp. 1–2

    2020

  124. [134]

    Robertson, E

    J. Robertson, E. Wade, Y. Kopp, J. Bueno, and A. Hur- tado, Toward neuromorphic photonic networks of ul- trafast spiking laser neurons, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics26, 1 (2020)

    2020

  125. [135]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Robertson, S. Xiang, M. Hejda, J. Bueno, and A. Hurtado, All-optical neuromorphic binary con- volution with a spiking vcsel neuron for image gradient magnitudes, Photon. Res.9, B201 (2021)

    2021

  126. [136]

    Raeis-Hosseini and J

    N. Raeis-Hosseini and J. Rho, Metasurfaces based on phase-change material as a reconfigurable plat- form for multifunctional devices, Materials 10, 10.3390/ma10091046 (2017)

    2017 doi

  127. [137]

    Feldmann, N

    J. Feldmann, N. Youngblood, C. David Wright, H. Bhaskaran, and W. Pernice, All-optical spiking neu- rosynaptic networks with self-learning capabilities, Na- ture 569, 208 (2019)

    2019

  128. [138]

    M. A. Nahmias, B. J. Shastri, A. N. Tait, T. F. de Lima, and P. R. Prucnal, Neuromorphic photonics, Opt. Pho- ton. News 29, 34 (2018)

    2018

  129. [139]

    T. Cao, R. Wang, R. E. Simpson, and G. Li, Photonic ge-sb-te phase change metamaterials and their appli- cations, Progress in Quantum Electronics 74, 100299 (2020)

    2020

  130. [140]

    Zheng, A

    J. Zheng, A. Khanolkar, P. Xu, S. Colburn, S. Desh- mukh, J. Myers, J. Frantz, E. Pop, J. Hendrickson, J. Doylend, N. Boechler, and A. Majumdar, Gst-on- silicon hybrid nanophotonic integrated circuits: a non- volatile quasi-continuously reprogrammable platform, Opt. Mater. Exp...

    2018

  131. [141]

    R´ ıos, N

    C. R´ ıos, N. Youngblood, Z. Cheng, M. L. Gallo, W. H. P. Pernice, C. D. Wright, A. Sebastian, and H. Bhaskaran, In-memory computing on a pho- tonic platform, Science Advances 5, eaau5759 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.aau5759

    2019 doi

  132. [142]

    R´ ıos, M

    C. R´ ıos, M. Stegmaier, P. Hosseini, D. Wang, T. Scherer, C. D. Wright, H. Bhaskaran, and W. H. P. Pernice, Integrated all-photonic non-volatile multi-level memory, Nature Photon9, 725 (2015)

    2015

  133. [143]

    Stegmaier, C

    M. Stegmaier, C. Rios, H. Bhaskaran, C. D. Wright, , and W. H. P. Pernice, Nonvolatile all-optical 1×2 switch for chipscale photonic networks, Advanced Optical Ma- terials 5, 1600346 (2016)

    2016

  134. [144]

    Cheng, C

    Z. Cheng, C. R´ ıos, W. H. P. Pernice, C. D. Wright, and H. Bhaskaran, On-chip photonic synapse, Science Advances 3, e1700160 (2017), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.1700160

    2017 doi

  135. [146]

    Chakraborty, G

    I. Chakraborty, G. Saha, A. Sengupta, and K. Roy, To- ward fast neural computing using all-photonic phase change spiking neurons, Scientific reports 8, 12980 (2018)

    2018

  136. [147]

    Kuzum, R

    D. Kuzum, R. Jeyasingh, B. Lee, and H. Wong, Na- noelectronic programmable synapses based on phase change materials for brain-inspired computing, Nano Lett. 12, 2179 (2012)

    2012

  137. [148]

    Rinzel and G

    J. Rinzel and G. Huguet, Nonlinear dynamics of neu- ronal excitability, oscillations, and coincidence detec- tion., Commun Pure Appl Math.66, 1464 (2013)

    2013

  138. [149]

    L. Yang, R. Ji, L. Zhang, J. Ding, , and Q. Xu, On- chip cmos-compatible optical signal processor, Optics express 20, 13560 (2012)

    2012

  139. [150]

    Chakraborty, G

    I. Chakraborty, G. Saha, and K. Roy, Photonic in- memory computing primitive for spiking neural net- works using phase-change materials, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 014063 (2019)

    2019

  140. [151]

    S. Pei, S. Tang, S. Yan, S. Jiang, X. Zhang, and Z. Zheng, How to enhance the dynamic range of excitatory-inhibitory excitable networks, Phys. Rev. E 86, 021909 (2012)

    2012

  141. [152]

    Zhang, M

    W. Zhang, M. Hejda, E. Malysheva, Q. R. A. Al-Taai, J. Javaloyes, E. Wasige, J. M. L. Figueiredo, V. Dolores- Calzadilla, B. Romeira, and A. Hurtado, Tunable presy- naptic weighting in optoelectronic spiking neurons built with laser-coupled resonant tunneling diodes, Journal o...

    2023

  142. [153]

    Hurtado, A

    A. Hurtado, A. Quirce, A. Valle, L. Pesquera, and M. Adams, Nonlinear dynamics induced by parallel and orthogonal optical injection in 1550 nm vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (vcsels), Opt Express.18, 9423 (2010)

    2010

  143. [154]

    Takougang, Kingni, G

    S. Takougang, Kingni, G. Van der Sande, L. Gelens, T.Erneux,andJ.Danckaert,Directmodulationofsemi- conductor ring lasers: Numerical and asymptotic anal- ysis, Opt. Soc. Am. B29, 1983 (2012)

    2012

  144. [155]

    Y. Lu, W. Zhang, B. Fu, and H. Z., Frequency- switched photonic spiking neurons, Opt Express 30, 21599 (2022)

    2022

  145. [156]

    M. A. Nahmias, A. N. Tait, B. J. Shastri, T. F. de Lima, and P. R. Prucnal, Excitable laser processing network node in hybrid silicon: analysis and simulation, Opt. Express 23, 26800 (2015)

    2015

  146. [157]

    Romeira, J

    B. Romeira, J. M. L. Figueiredo, and J. Javaloyes, De- lay dynamics of neuromorphic optoelectronic nanoscale resonators: Perspectives and applications, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 27, 114323 (2017), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/cha/article- pdf/doi/10....

    2017 doi

  147. [158]

    Cimbri, J

    D. Cimbri, J. Wang, A. Al-Khalidi, and E. Wasige, Resonant tunneling diodes high-speed terahertz wire- less communications - a review, IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology12, 226 (2022)

    2022

  148. [159]

    M. A. Nahmias, B. J. Shastri, A. N. Tait, and P. R. Prucnal, A leaky integrate-and-fire laser neuron for ul- trafast cognitive computing, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics19, 1 (2013)

    2013

  149. [160]

    Robertson, E

    J. Robertson, E. Wade, and A. Hurtado, Electrically controlled neuron-like spiking regimes in vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers at ultrafast rates, IEEE Journal 30 of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics25, 1 (2019)

    2019

  150. [161]

    P. R. Prucnal, B. J. Shastri, T. F. de Lima, M. A. Nah- mias, and A. N. Tait, Recent progress in semiconductor excitable lasers for photonic spike processing, Adv. Opt. Photon. 8, 228 (2016)

    2016

  151. [162]

    take off

    classification problem has been demonstrated. It is shown that the spike laser neuron performs coincidence detection with nanosecond time resolution with a refrac- tive period of about 0.1 ns. In addition, [163] proposed a physical model for pattern recognition based on photon...

    2024

  152. [163]

    Robertson, T

    J. Robertson, T. Deng, J. Javaloyes, and A. Hurtado, Controlled inhibition of spiking dynamics in vcsels for neuromorphic photonics: theory and experiments, Opt. Lett. 42, 1560 (2017)

    2017

  153. [164]

    Hurtado, I

    A. Hurtado, I. D. Henning, and M. J. Adams, Optical neuron using polarisation switching in a 1550nm-vcsel, Opt. Express 18, 25170 (2010)

    2010

  154. [165]

    T. Deng, J. Robertson, and A. Hurtado, Controlled propagation of spiking dynamics in vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers: Towards neuromorphic pho- tonic networks, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics 23, 1 (2017)

    2017

  155. [166]

    H.-T. Peng, G. Angelatos, T. F. de Lima, M. A. Nah- mias, A. N. Tait, S. Abbaslou, B. J. Shastri, and P. R. Prucnal, Temporal information processing with an inte- grated laser neuron, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics 26, 1 (2020)

    2020

  156. [167]

    Xiang, Y

    S. Xiang, Y. Zhang, J. Gong, X. Guo, L. Lin, and Y. Hao, Stdp-based unsupervised spike pattern learn- ing in a photonic spiking neural network with vcsels and vcsoas, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quan- tum Electronics 25, 1 (2019)

    2019

  157. [168]

    Ma and W

    B. Ma and W. Zou, Demonstration of a distributed feed- back laser diode working as a graded-potential-signaling photonic neuron and its application to neuromorphic information processing, Sci. China Inf. Sci.63, 160408 (2020)

    2020

  158. [169]

    Toole, A

    R. Toole, A. N. Tait, T. Ferreira de Lima, M. A. Nah- mias, B. J. Shastri, P. R. Prucnal, and M. P. Fok, Pho- tonic implementation of spike-timing-dependent plastic- ity and learning algorithms of biological neural systems, Journal of Lightwave Technology34, 470 (2016)

    2016

  159. [170]

    Coomans, L

    W. Coomans, L. Gelens, S. Beri, J. Danckaert, and G. Van der Sande, Solitary and coupled semiconduc- tor ring lasers as optical spiking neurons, Phys. Rev. E 84, 036209 (2011)

    2011

  160. [171]

    Kelleher, C

    B. Kelleher, C. Bonatto, G. Huyet, and S. P. Hegarty, Excitability in optically injected semiconductor lasers: Contrasting quantum- well- and quantum-dot-based de- vices, Phys. Rev. E83, 026207 (2011)

    2011

  161. [172]

    B.Kelleher, D.Goulding, S.P.Hegarty, G.Huyet, D.-Y. Cong, A. Martinez, A. Lemaˆitre, A. Ramdane, M. Fis- cher, F. Gersch¨ utz, and J. Koeth, Excitable phase slips in an injection-locked single-mode quantum-dot laser, Opt. Lett. 34, 440 (2009)

    2009

  162. [173]

    Alexander, T

    K. Alexander, T. V. Vaerenbergh, M. Fiers, P. Mechet, J. Dambre, and P. Bienstman, Excitability in optically injected microdisk lasers with phase controlled excita- tory and inhibitory response, Opt. Express 21, 26182 (2013)

    2013

  163. [174]

    B. J. Shastri, M. A. Nahmias, A. N. Tait, A. W. Ro- driguez, B. Wu, and P. R. Prucnal, Spike processing with a graphene excitable laser, Sci Rep6, 19126 (2016)

    2016

  164. [175]

    Berggren, Q

    K. Berggren, Q. Xia, K. K. Likharev, D. B. Strukov, H. Jiang, T. Mikolajick, D. Querlioz, M. Salinga, J. R. Erickson, S. Pi,et al., Roadmap on emerging hardware and technology for machine learning, Nanotechnology 32, 012002 (2020)

    2020

  165. [176]

    J. M. Shainline, S. M. Buckley, A. N. McCaughan, J. Chiles, A. Jafari-Salim, R. P. Mirin, and S. W. Nam, Circuit designs for superconducting optoelectronic loop neurons,JournalofAppliedPhysics 124,152130(2018), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5038031

    2018 doi

  166. [177]

    J. M. Shainline, S. M. Buckley, A. N. McCaughan, J. T. Chiles, A. Jafari Salim, M. Castellanos-Beltran, C. A. Donnelly, M. L. Schneider, R. P. Mirin, and S. W. Nam, Superconducting optoelectronic loop neu- rons, Journal of Applied Physics 126, 044902 (2019), https://doi.org/10...

    2019 doi

  167. [178]

    S. Khan, B. Primavera, J. Chiles, A. McCaughan, S. Buckley, A. Tait, A. Lita, J. Biesecker, A. Fox, D. Olaya,et al., Superconducting optoelectronic single- photon synapses (2022)

    2022

  168. [179]

    J. M. Shainline, B. A. Primavera, and S. Khan, Phe- nomenological model of superconducting optoelectronic loop neurons, Physical Review Research 5, 013164 (2023)

    2023

  169. [180]

    D. S. Pashin, P. V. Pikunov, M. V. Bastrakova, A. E. Schegolev, N. V. Klenov, and I. I. Soloviev, A bifunc- tional superconducting cell as flux qubit and neuron, Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology14, 1116 (2023)

    2023

  170. [181]

    L. E. Su´ arez, B. A. Richards, G. Lajoie, and B. Misic, Learning function from structure in neuromorphic net- works, Nature Machine Intelligence3, 771 (2021)

    2021

  171. [182]

    H. Cai, Z. Ao, C. Tian, Z. Wu, H. Liu, J. Tchieu, M. Gu, K. Mackie, and F. Guo, Brain organoid reservoir com- puting for artificial intelligence, Nature Electronics 6, 1032 (2023)

    2023

  172. [183]

    L. E. Su´ arez, A. Mihalik, F. Milisav, K. Marshall, M. Li, P. E. V´ ertes, G. Lajoie, and B. Misic, Connectome- based reservoir computing with the conn2res toolbox, Nature Communications 15, 656 (2024)

    2024

  173. [184]

    Smirnova, B

    L. Smirnova, B. S. Caffo, D. H. Gracias, Q. Huang, I. E. Morales Pantoja, B. Tang, D. J. Zack, C. A. Berlinicke, J. L. Boyd, T. D. Harris,et al., Organoid intelligence (oi): the new frontier in biocomputing and intelligence- in-a-dish, Frontiers in Science1, 1017235 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.