TiO{}_{2}-based Memristors and ReRAM: Materials, Mechanisms and Models (a Review)

TiO-based Memristors and ReRAM: Materials, Mechanisms and Models (a Review)


The memristor is the fundamental non-linear circuit element, with uses in computing and computer memory. ReRAM (Resistive Random Access Memory) is a resistive switching memory proposed as a non-volatile memory. In this review we shall summarise the state of the art for these closely-related fields, concentrating on titanium dioxide, the well-utilised and archetypal material for both. We shall cover material properties, switching mechanisms and models to demonstrate what ReRAM and memristor scientists can learn from each other and examine the outlook for these technologies.

1 Introduction

The semiconductor industry has, for many years, managed to increase the number of components per chip according to Moore’s law (geometrical scaling). Further advances have been achieved through functional diversification (‘More-than-Moore’), namely complementary technologies that increase the usefulness of electronic systems by adding extra functionality. According to the International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, to continue at this rate the semiconductor industry needs to combine further miniaturisation with this type of functional diversification, as well as investigate a future beyond CMOS [1]. There are several technologies that might fit such a desire, two of which are memristors and Resistive Random Access Memory (ReRAM, also known as RRAM).

In this short review, we shall cover the material properties, elucidated mechanisms and current models in order to explain the state of these fast-moving fields. ReRAM is usually based on transition metal oxides such as TiO, SrTiO [2, 3], NiO [4], CuO [5], ZnO [6], MnO [7], HfO [8], TaO [9], TiO/TiO [10], TaO/TiO [11]; both binary and perovskite oxides are capable of resistance switching. Memristors can be made out of TiO, chalcogenides [12], polymers [13, 14], atomic switches [15], spintronic systems [16] and quantum systems [17]. Biological material and mechanisms like sweat ducts [18], leaves [19, 20], blood [21], slime mould [22, 23], synapses [24, 25] and neurons [26] can be described as memristive. In this review we shall restrict our focus to TiO-based memristors and ReRAM because TiO is the material that has received most work in memristors and is a well-studied and archetypal system within ReRAM [27]. We shall start by going through a brief the history of the fields, then the materials and mechanisms before looking at the models in more detail.

The resistor, capacitor, and inductor are the three well-known fundamental circuit elements, discovered in 1745, 1827 and 1831 respectively. Based on an assumption of completeness (see figure 1), in 1971 Leon Chua postulated a 4 fundamental circuit element [28] which would relate charge to magnetic flux and would have the distinction of being the first non-linear circuit element (where the non-linearity arises because and are integrals of the circuit measurables, current, and voltage, ). No physical instantiations of the memristor were generally acknowledged until 2008 when Strukov et al. realised that their molecular electronic switches’ behaviour was due to the titanium electrodes and not the organic layer [29] and announced that they had found the memristor [30]. At that time, it was believed that memristors could not have been made contemporary with the other fundamental circuit elements as memristance was a nanoscale phenomenon [30], ‘essentially unobservable at the millimetre scale’ and above [29] (since experimentally disproved by the fabrication of macroscopic memristors [31, 32, 33, 34]). It later became apparent that memristor-like devices had been fabricated before 2008: resistance switching was first observed in oxides in a gold-silicon monooxide-gold sandwich in 1963 [35], the first metal oxide resistance switch was reported in nickel oxide in 1964 [36], memristor-like switching curves were observed in TiO thin films in 1968 [37] and the memistor [38], a 3-terminal memristive system, was fabricated in 1960 (although is disputed as being an example of a memristive system [39]). These examples inspired some searches for the earliest known memristor [40, 41] with the singing arc [42] in 1880 and the coherer in 1899 [43] being the oldest devices identified so far.

Figure 1: The four circuit measurables and the six relationships between them.

When the memristor was announced the field of ReRAM was already mature: two contemporary reviews [44, 45] summarise the state of the art. ReRAM is generally made of a metal-insulator-metal structure, typically using transition metal oxides as the insulator, while the electrodes tend to be a noble metal, with Pt being a popular choice (but Al, Au, ITO (Indium Tin Oxide) and Si are all also common). ReRAM has two resistance states: a high resistance state (HRS) and low resistance state (LRS). It also has two switching modes that go between them. The simplest to understand is bipolar resistance switching (BRS) where the device switches depending on the magnitude and direction of the applied voltage. The other is unipolar resistance switching (UPS) which depends only on the magnitude of the voltage. Both BPS and UPS - curves resemble memristor curves, a fact which has led to much debate in scientific literature. In this review, we shall compare and contrast the approaches of both fields, using titanium dioxide devices as examples.

2 Materials

One reason for the confusion between the fields of memristors and ReRAM is the different standard measurements. The term ReRAM refers to a suggested use for a range of materials (namely as memory), whereas memristors are named after a property and have been investigated not just for RAM, but also for such uses as neuromorphic hardware (e.g. [46, 25, 47, 48, 49, 17, 50]), chaotic circuits (e.g. [51, 52, 53, 54]), processors (e.g.  [55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60]), vision processors (e.g. [25, 61, 62, 63, 64]) and robot control (e.g. [65, 66, 50]) to name a few. Memristor measurements tend to be a.c. measurements, often done at different frequencies. This is partly because initially the memristor was thought to be a purely a.c. device and only recently have the d.c. aspects of the device received attention [48, 67, 68, 69]. ReRAM measurements are reported in different ways depending on the type of device. BPS devices are measured in a similar way to memristors; but UPS devices are taken to a high voltage with a compliance current set, which is the method of forming the device. After forming, the device is then taken around a positive voltage loop from low to high voltage (where the high voltage is usually below the forming voltage). As UPS ReRAM is not subjected to bipolar voltage waveforms, it is difficult to compare them to memristors.

The first device called a memristor was made from TiO thin film [30], but the first TiO thin film device that demonstrated memristor curves was fabricated in 1963 [37], this work showed the film pass through a family of hysteretic curves during repeated tests: from pinched open curves (resembling a jelly-bean in shape), to BPS curves before collapsing to a single line as the device degraded. Resistance switching in TiO materials had been seen several times in ReRAM experiments before 2008, for example: sputter-grown TiO with Pt electrodes [70] and Pt-TiO-Ru stacks [71]. But it was not until Hewlett-Packard’s announcement that people became interested in making memristors, and so the report in 2009 [72] of a flexible Al-TiO-Al memristor fabricated using solution processing garnered a lot of interest (a flexible ReRAM equivalent came out the same year [73]). The use of aluminium electrodes however, did suggest that aluminium oxide might be involved in the switching: XPS and EELS has shown the existence of a layer of AlO in Al-TiO-Al ReRAM BPS devices [74], AlO had been added to organic memory devices to improve switching [75] and been implicated in resistance switching [76, 77, 78, 79]. There is evidence for Al being supportive in TiO resistive switches grown by atomic deposition [71] and there is even intriguing evidence for a mixed phase [80]. In [72] the authors state that the devices still switch if the electrode materials are changed to a noble metal (Au) and [81] showed that changing the device electrode changes the form and reversibility of the switching. Other work has concentrated on making cheaper and easier to manufacture memristor devices  [34, 82, 83], but presently the memristor is a difficult device to manufacture for the purposes of experimental testing, which has led to the field being centred around simulation and theoretical work.

3 Mechanisms

Many suggested mechanisms have been put forward to explain the causes of resistance switching and of memristance, and TiO-based devices have examples of all of them. The high resistance material is generally believed to be stoichiometric TiO [30], but there is debate about what the low resistance material is, and, given that the memristors/ReRAM are made in several different ways there is no expectation that there is a single explanation or material cause.

The most popular suggested mechanisms can be split into two groups: ionic and thermal.

3.1 Ionic

The ionic mechanism in TiO devices involve the migration of oxygen vacancies (although suggestions of migrating OH ions have been made [77, 84]). This movement of vacancies creates auto-doped phases which are metallically conducting for TiO for  [85]. The oxygen ions may combine at the anode and evolve O gas, this has been seen in ReRAM [86], the Strukov memristor when fabricated with macroscale electrodes [87] and the sol-gel memristor [81]. There is some evidence that the choice of electrode material can hinder the production of O, for example, it is thought aluminium supports TiO memristance by acting as a source or sink of oxygen ions [74, 88]. Most memristor-based modelling has concentrated on modelling the flow of these oxygen vacancies (see later). [89] suggests that switching is dominated by ionic motion rather than charge trapping. A mixed mechanism involving oxygen vacancy transport between the tip of a conducting filament (itself formed by thermal mechanism) and an electrode has been suggested [90]. Alternative electrochemical mechanisms that explain memristance via a change in titanium oxidation state, Ti(IV)Ti(III), have been put forward [84] although not widely adopted.

3.2 Thermal

Joule heating is the process where the application of an electric field and flowing current heats the material and changes its structure. TiO atomic deposition thin films can form conducting filaments as extended defects along grain boundaries [91], the ions drift, forming a path which breaks with excess heat (i.e. too high a voltage) and can be reformed via the same mechanism. This mechanism has been credited with causing both HRS and LRS states [71]. Single crystals of SrTiO show switching in the skin after being subjected to an electric field under ultra-high vacuum. This causes ‘dislocations’ which are broken by ambient oxygen and then reformed via electroforming. This is present in a crystalline structure and suggests a poly-filamentary mechanism [86]. The conduction channels are usually ohmic and it has been shown that the resistance and reset current bears little relation to the composition of the material or whether it is operated in a unipolar or bipolar mode, which suggests, and has been verified by simulation, that the mechanism is thermally activated dissolution of conducting filaments [92]. This could explain why compliance current choice controls the resistance and reset current and suggests that larger resistance values are more related with the heat sink effects of the metal oxide, rather than its electronic properties.

The form of these conducting filaments / channels is debated. In 2009 A Pt-TiO-Pt ReRAM showed a Magnéli phase [88], TiO, crystallographic shear plane from Rutile [93], roughly 10-20nm in diameter and which shows metallic (i.e. ohmic) conduction. Magnéli phases are considered likely to be the material cause as they are more thermodynamically stable than vacancies spread through-out the material [94]. Single crystal TiO nanorods have shown bipolar switching [95] which have a rectifying effect. Conical Magnéli phase filaments have been observed and shown to be the cause of fusing and anti-fusing BPS [96]. Hourglass-shaped Magnéli phases were seen in [88], which were formed by alternating polarity voltage and proved to be more stable in operation. Fractal conducting filaments, have been suggested by simulation [97], observed [98] and are thought to relate to dielectric breakdown [99]. From spectromicroscopy and TEM, electroforming the Strukov memristor has been found to produce an ordered TiO Magnéli phase [100].

3.3 Other mechanisms

Other mechanisms have been put forward. The UPS switching has credited to: metal-semiconductor transitions [101], crystalline TiO-amorphous TiO phase transition via conduction heating and breaking [71], raising and lowering Schottky barriers via bulk (UPS) or interface (BPS) transport of oxygen [2], and conductance heating causing lateral transport of conducting filaments [92]. There is also a debate as to what the structure of the less-conducting thin-film TiO is, with rutile (-TiO[71] and amorphous titanium dixoide (-TiO) being the most popular suggestions. Note, that -TiO has also been suggested as the conducting form of TiO and that Magnéli phases are sheer planes from -TiO.

Currently, the Magnéli conducting filaments are the most generally accepted mechanism, but as all the materials are treated differently, measured differently, and titanium dioxide has a wealth of behaviours, it is unlikely that there will emerge only one explanation for all published TiO devices.

4 Models

Generally, ReRAM modelling has concentrated on models based on the materials science and chemistry of the devices (and are described above), whereas the memristor, by virtue of being predicted from electronic engineering theory tends to include more physics- and mathematics-based approaches.

4.1 Models based on materials science

Chua’s 1971 paper [28] made the observation that there were only five relations between the four circuit measurables: charge, , magnetic flux, , current, and voltage, . Two relations were the definitions of charge and flux (as and ), the other three were the constitutive definitions of the resistor (), capacitor () and inductor (). From these facts, the missing 6 relationship would be , see figure 1. When Strukov et al. announced their discovery of a memristor [30] they included a simple model based on treating the memristor as two space-conserving variable resistors in which they considered the velocity of the boundary between TiO and TiO phases. This model has been both highly criticised and widely used, both as is and with extensions.

The model as reported [30] did not include the magnetic flux which is expected from Chua’s definition [28]. This lead to questions, including the question of whether a memristor had actually been fabricated [102]. Attempted solutions to this issue have included fixes to the model [103], statements that the magnetic flux was a theoretical construct [30, 104] and not related to a material property [40] or that it was the non-linear relation between and that defined the device [30]. The Strukov model as presented assumes linear dopant drift under a uniform field [30], which is widely believed to be unlikely in devices with high electronic field [105]. Several people have undertaken to fix this: [106] introduced the concept of a rectangular ‘window’ function that would prevent from going out of its bounds (0 and – the thickness of the semiconductor layer) and slowed the rate of motion down near the boundary edges (making it non-linear), [107] improved on this to prevent from getting stuck at the boundaries and [108] adjusted it to allow the maximum to be tuned to less than 1, thereby introducing more variability in device modelling, [109] concentrated on applying the models to nanostructures and  [110] concentrated on neuromorphic systems. A further confusion arises from the widely-interpreted implication that the uniform field is across the entire device suggested by the wording in [30], which is not what was intended [111]. A field with a discontinuity is problematic from the electrochemical point of view [112], especially as the discontinuity is located on  [113], and may require further work with windowing functions.

Despite these issues, the Strukov model has been highly adopted, and most work involves simulating with it or improving it with window functions. An in-depth discussion of the uses of it is beyond the scope of this review, but it has generally been used to model test circuits, often using SPICE (Simulation Program for Integrated Circuits Emphasis, a standard electronic engineering simulation package) and comparisons of different SPICE implementations of the models described in this section are given in [114, 115]. Three models have extended it,  [116] demonstrated a SPICE model with the initial state as a variable, Georgiou et al. extended the model using Bernoulli formulation, introducing extra parameter to get a measure of the device hysteresis [117] and  [118] extended it by demonstrating a SPICE model of a magnetic flux-controlled memristor.

Other models have been proposed for use in modelling TiO devices based on more realistic models of the materials. A model based on the idea of setting to the tunnelling barrier length between TiO and the electrode was derived by experimentally fitting to the Strukov memristor after electroforming had created a localised conducting channel [119]. This model gives good agreement with experimental data [119], but has the drawbacks of being difficult to simulate (containing a hyperbolic sine term and two exponential terms) and uses 8 fitting parameters for which the experimental analogues are not completely clear (although they are related to nonlinearities due to the high field and Joule heating [120]). The data in [119] has been used to create other models: [121] presented a version implemented in SPICE; [120] presented a more general model with a threshold that was easier to simulate; [122] presented a tunnelling model that required only one fitting parameter, which has also been implemented in SPICE [123]; [124] presented a tunnelling model that included a threshold relation and was applied to both memristors and ReRAM. A good model requires that ‘any parameters in the model determined by fitting to experimental data should be intrinsic to the device’ [125]. There is a trade-off between the quality of the fit, which can require many fitting coefficients; and the relation to physical processes, which requires that each fitting coefficient is strongly related to a real-world property.

The trend in building memristor device models is currently towards the more general (in that they can model more devices and types of devices), experimentally-informed (in that the model can be understood in terms of the physical processes happening in the device), easy-to-simulate models.

4.2 Models based on electronic engineering

As Strukov’s model is phenomenological, so the derivation of Chua’s model was more rigorous and mathematical, nonetheless, the theoretical idea of a memristor has not escaped the influence of real devices. Before a memristor was identified, the concept of a memristor was expanded to that of a memristive system [126], which has two state variables, this concept was used to describe a thermistor and neuron ion channels. Since the discovery of a memristor device, the terminology has changed to refer to memristive systems as a type of memristor, rather than vice versa. In 2011, Chua published a paper [40] in which he asserted that all ReRAM devices with pinched hysteresis loops are memristors. In [40] Chua suggested that experimentalists should record - data because - curves are open to effects of input voltage (a point well illustrated in [117], which offers an attempted theoretical solution) and are not predictive. The focus shifted in [127] where the frequency dependence (which is mentioned in the 1971 paper [28]) is elevated to being two of the three identifying ‘fingerprints’ for experimentalists to search for (namely that the hysteresis loop shrinks as the frequency tends to infinity). Further expansions of the memristor idea have been undertaken. The memristor is a passive device, but the idea of an active memristor has been shown to be useful [54, 23, 51]. The pinched hysteresis loop, the most distinctive property of the memristor, has been relaxed to a non-self-crossing pinched hysteresis loop [128, 129, 18] (matching experimental data for memristors [37, 130] and for ReRAM [131]). These changes have led to some criticism [132] that theoretical ideas cannot be redefined at whim to fit experimental data. This is an interesting point to ponder. A theory that has no relevance to real world systems is of little practical use, and adjusting the presentation and switching which properties are necessary to define device behaviour and which are merely indicative in response to a larger group of discovered devices seems, to me at least, to be entirely appropriate for theoretical science. Nonetheless, none the changes in the definition of the memristor put forward by Chua have changed the basic concept, that of a non-linear resistor which relates the time integral of the current to the time integral of the voltage and produces pinched (although now not necessarily self-crossing) - curves which shrink with increasing frequency.

5 Memristors and ReRAM - one field or two?

Having presented an overview of both fields it is worth asking if they are one field or two. Initially the two communities ignored each other and thus several memristor papers published early on presented phenomena already discovered within ReRAM (as described earlier) and, even now, some ReRAM papers fail to reference memristor work [133]. Generally, opinion has shifted to ReRAM scientists using and extending [131] memristor theory, while memristor scientists look to ReRAM to explain device properties [134, 135], suggesting that even if they are not the same field there is at least convergence between them. Some researchers are even using the terms interchangeably [136] and some are taking memristors as just another type of technology with which to build ReRAM [137].

Questions highlighting the differences remain however: The memristor is defined as a nonlinear, analogue device; so devices that undergo ohmic conduction (as seen in conductive filaments) are not strictly memristors, although it is possible to model them by including conducting channels in the device model [138]. However, the memristor equations at certain frequencies do give more triangular shaped curves [30] which can match the observed shape ( Figure 6.). To match memristor theory (Figure 6) to real devices, different extensions to the theory, such as non-zero crossing [131], conducting filaments [138], active memristors [54] and analysis of use cases such as reading and writing operations of memory [136, 139] are required. However, memristor theory is so elegant and useful (for example, it neatly explains the behaviour of - loops shrinking to a single valued function that has been observed in ReRAM [37, 71]), it seems worth the effort to add real-world considerations.

The question of whether the work belongs in one or two fields is far from a settled one. It seems, however, that BPS ReRAM (Figure 6) is a real-world instantiation of the memristor and whether UPS ReRAM (Figure 6) is considered a memristor depends which formulation of the memristor definition you adopt: whilst in the ohmic conducting regime UPS ReRAM does not satisfy the 1971 definition [28] of the memristor, because the memristance is not changing with . The system can, however, be described as a memristive system as per the 1976 definition [126] with the state of conducting filaments (i.e. fused or connecting) as a second state variable. Under the nomenclature put forward in [40] these devices can thus be considered memristors.


[]0.4 {subfigure}[]0.4

Figure 2: Typical unipolar ReRAM
Figure 3: Typical bipolar ReRAM

[]0.4 {subfigure}[]0.4

Figure 4: Theoretical Memristor V-I
Figure 5: An Example Memristor curve [81]
Figure 6: Predicted and typical ReRAM and Memristor curves.Note that the example from [81] switches from on to off, many memristors switch the opposite way round, and would go around the I-V curve in the opposite direction

6 The Future

The memristor has only been understood as an existent device for five and half years and in that time it has drastically effected the outlook for ReRAM devices by providing a deeper theoretical understanding of aspects of their operation and suggesting uses for these devices other than merely as a novel type of storage. In turn, the rich history and vast amount of work on the materials, their properties and how they can be controlled that comes from ReRAM scientists have allowed the memristor concept to move from interesting phenomenon to practical device far quicker than would otherwise have happened. I suspect that the trend for ReRAM and memristors to be increasingly be viewed as describing the same phenomena will continue.

Currently, work is going in several directions. The first computer containing ReRAM memory (based on TaO) was announced by Panasonic in 2013, but many people and a few companies, are racing to produce their competing commercial memristor/ReRAM memory, be it computer RAM, flash drives or other form of storage, and so there is a lot of work on stabilising and controlling the device’s properties and looking for other materials for manufacturing.

The first commercial suggestion for memristors was memory because the memristor’s small feature size could offer an increase in memory density, wouldn’t require power to hold a value (so it is low energy electronics) and could be used for multi-state memory. Alongside the usual manufacturing faults, memristors suffer some unique issues on which there has been much work and many attempted fixes, both based on memristor theory [139, 136] and experiment [140]. For example, according to the theory, memristor state will change when read, affecting data integrity, this can be solved by using a read pulse below a threashold time [139] or a reading algorithm that reads and then rewrites the memory cells [141] (this is also useful for reducing sneak-path-related read errors). Other work has focused on improving memory tests to identify undefined states [136] and fabrication errors  [142] (by making use of sneak paths to test several memristors at the same time). A big problem for memristor-based cross-bar memory is sneak paths which can result in erroneous memory values being read and are a big problem for shrinking memory size. Attempted solutions include: Hewlett-Packard’s reading algorithm [141] described above; unfolding the memory (only one memristor per column/row, which greatly reduces the possible gains from shrinking memory size; adding an active element like a diode [143], which might add delay, or a transistor gate [137], which would remove the advantage of the memristor’s small size; using anti-series memristors as the memory element so that the total resistance is always  [144], this would require differentiating between and for logical values; using multiple access points [145]; using a.c. sensing [146] at the cost of increased complexity; making use of the memristors own non-linearity (instead of a diode) [11, 140]; making use of a 3-terminal memristor [147] (instead of a transistor) which forces sneak paths to have a higher than resistance (which is the best case failure for sneak paths) but requires an additional column line. The authors of [147] concentrated on the memistor [38] as an example device, but intriguingly the idea could be applied to the 3-terminal plastic memristor [148, 149]. For memristor-based memory to be adopted, there is much further work to be done in this area, especially on experimentally testing these approaches.

Another big area is the design and fabrication of neuromorphic computers using memristors, which will require novel approaches and hardware instantiations. Because memristors can implement IMPLY logic, Bertrand Russell’s logical system [150] is getting something of a renaissance. If memristors natively implement IMPLY logic [69], perhaps as spikes [151, 56], then there will be a lot of work on engineering memristors into current circuit design approaches (which traditionally use AND, OR, NOT, NAND and similar). Several workers have suggested doing digitised stateful logic in CMOS-compatible cross-bar memory arrays (using the IMPLY and FALSE operation set) and started to look at design methodologies: as in [118], making encoders/decoders out of transistor-memristor arrays [152] and making use of the parallelisability of the architecture for simultaneous bitwise vector operations [153]. Recently, several researchers have started to look at hysteresis [154, 155, 117, 156] and other figures of merit [157, 158, 108] of practical use to engineers.

An interesting and unexpected outcome of this work is the discovery that evolution has made use of memristors and memristive mechanisms, where living memristors have been identified in leaves, skin, blood, and eukaryotic mould so far, and memristor theory has been used to understand learning in the synapses and simple organisms and to update neuron models such the Hodgkin-Huxley [26]. This could suggest that electrophysiology is a field ripe for memristor research and perhaps the most ground-breaking memristor work will come from linking the manufactured devices with living memristors, either directly or via the creation of bio-inspired computers which may usher in an entirely new paradigm of computational approaches.


This work was supported by EPSRC on grant EP/HO14381/1. The author would like to thank Oliver Matthews and Ben de Lacy Costello for useful discussions.



  1. Current Address: School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, 12a Priory Road, Bristol, BS8 1TU, UK. E-mail: ella.gale@bristol.ac.uk


  1. International technology roadmap for semiconductors 2012 update overview. Technical report, International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors 2012, 2012.
  2. M.H. Tang, Z.P. Wang, J.C. Li, Z.Q. Zeng, X.L. Xu, G.Y. Wang, L.B. Zhang, Y.G. Xiao, S.B. Yang, B. Jiang, and J. He. Bipolar and unipolar resistive switching behaviors of sol-gel-derived SrTiO3 thin films with different compliance currents. Semiconductor Science and Technology, 26:075019 (4pp), 2011.
  3. Xianwen Sun, Guoqiang Li, Xin’an Zhang, Linghong Ding, and Weifeng Zhang. Coexistence of the bipolar and unipolar resistive switching behaviours in Au/StTiO3/Pt cells. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 44:125404 (5pp), 2011.
  4. L. Goux, J.G. Lisoni, M. Jruczak, D.J. Wouters, L. Courtade, and Ch. Muller. Coexistence of bipolar and unipolar resistive-switching modes in NiO cells made by thermal oxidation of Ni layers. Journal of Applied Physics, 107:024512, 2010.
  5. R. Yasuhara, K. Fujiwara, K. Horiba, H. Kumigashira, and M. Kotsugi. Inhomogeneous chemical states in resistance-switching devices with a planar-type Pt/CuO/Pt structure. Applied Physics Letters, 95:012110, 2009.
  6. Wen-Yuan Chang, Yen-Chao Lai, Tai-Bor Wu, Sea-Fue Wang, Frederick Chen, and Ming-Jinn Tsai. Unipolar resistive switching characteristics of ZnO thin films for nonvolatile memory applications. Applied Physics Letters, 92:022110, 2008.
  7. Sen Zhang, Shibing Long, Weihua Guan, Qi Liu, Qin Wang, and Ming Liu. Resistive switching characteristics of MnOx-based ReRAM. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 42:055112, 2009.
  8. C.H. Lien, Y.S. Chen, H.Y. Lee, P.S. Chen, F.T. Chen, and M.-J. Tsai. The highly scalable and reliable hafnium oxide ReRAM and its future challenges. In Proceedings of 2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Solid-State and Integrated Circuit Technology (ICSICT), pages 1084 – 1087, 2010.
  9. Feng Miao, John Paul Strachan, J. Joshua Yang, Min-Xian Zhang, Ilan Goldfarb, Antonio C. Torrezan, Peter Eschbach, Ronald D. Kelley, Gilberto Medeiros-Ribeiro, and R. Stanley Williams. Anatomy of a nanoscale conduction channel reveals the mechanism of a high-performance memristor. Advanced Materials, 23(47):5633–5640, 2011.
  10. Yuchao Yang, Patrick Sheridan, and Wei Lu. Complementary resistive switching in tantalum oxide-based resistive memory devices. Applied Physics Letters, 100:203112 (4pp), 2012.
  11. J. J. Yang, M.X. Zhang, M.D. Pickett, Feng Miao, J.P. Strachan, W.D. Li, W. Yi an D. A.A. Ohlberg, B.J. Choi, W. Wu, J.H.Nickel, G. Medeiros-Ribeiro, and R.S. Williams. Engineering nonlinearity into memristors for passive crossbar applications. Applied Physics Letters, 100:113501 (4pp), 2012.
  12. A.S. Oblea, A. Timilsina, D. Moore, and K.A. Campbell. Silver chalcogenide based memristor devices. In Neural Networks (IJCNN), The 2010 International Joint Conference on, pages 1–3, July 2010.
  13. Francesca Pincella, Paolo Camorani, and Victor Erokhin. Electrical properties of an organic memristive system. Applied Physics A, 104:1039–1046, 2011.
  14. Hu Young Jeong, Jong Yun Kim, Jeong Won Kim, Jin Ok Hwang, Ji-Eun Kim, Jeong Yong Lee, Tae Hyun Yoon, Byung Jin Cho, Sang Ouk Kim, Rodney S. Ruoff, and Sung-Yool Choi. Graphene oxide thin films for flexible nonvolatile memory applications. Nano Letters, 10(11):4381–4386, 2010.
  15. Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Alpana Nayak, Takeo Ohno, Kazuya Terabe, Tohru Tsuruoka, James K. Gimzewski, and Masakazu Aono. Memristive operations demonstrated by gap-type atomic switches. Appl. Phys. A, 102:811–815, 2011.
  16. Y. V. Pershin and M. Di Ventra. Spin memristive systems: Spin memory effects in semiconductor spintronics. Phys. Rev. B, 78:113309–1 – 113309–4, 2008.
  17. Yuriy V. Pershin and Massimiliano Di Ventra. Neuromorphic, digital and quantum computation with memory circuit elements. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100:2071–2081, June 2012.
  18. C.A. Lütken S. Grimes and O.G. Martinsen. Memristive properties of human sweat ducts. World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedial Engineering, 25/7:696–698, 2009.
  19. Shiv Prasad Kosta, Y.P. Kosta, Avinash Gaur, Yogesh M. Dube, J. P. Chuadhari, Jignesh Patoliya, Shakti Kosta, Paresh Panchal, Piyush Vaghela, Kalpesh Patel, Bhavin Patel, Ritesh Bhatt, and Vimal Patel. New vistas of electronics towards biological (biomass) sensors. International Journal of Academic Research, pages 511–526, 2011.
  20. Alexander G. Volkov, Clayton Tucket, Jada Reedus, Maya I. Volkova, Vladislav S. Markin, and Leon Chua. Memristors in plants. Plant Signalling and Behavior, 9:e28152 (8pp), 2014.
  21. S.P. Kosta, Y.P. Kosta, Mukta Bhatele, Y.M. Dubey, Avinash Gaur, Shakti Kosta, Jyoti Gupta, Amit Patel, and Bhavin Patel. Human blood liquid memristor. International Journal of Medical Engineering and Informatics, pages 16–29, 2011.
  22. Yurij V. Pershin, Steven La Fontaine, and Massimiliano di Ventra. Memristive model of amoeba’s learning. Phys. Rev. E, 80:021926 (6 pages), 2009.
  23. Ella Gale, Andrew Adamatzky, and Ben de Lacy Costello. Slime mould memristors. arXiv, June:1306.3414v1, 2013.
  24. Bernabé Linares-Barranco and Teresa Serrano-Gotarredona. Memristance can explain spike-time dependent plasticity in neural synapses. Nature Precedings, 2009.
  25. Carlos Zamarreno-Ramos, Luis A. Carmu nas, Jose A. Pérez-Carrasco, Timotheée Masquelier, Teresa Serrano-Gotarredona, and Bernabé Linares-Barranco. On spike-timing dependent plasticity, memristive devices and building a self-learning visual cortex. Frontiers in Neuormorphic engineering, 5:26(1)–26(20), 2011.
  26. Leon Chua, Valery Sbitnev, and Hyongsuk Kim. Hodgkin-Huxley axon is made of memristors. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 22:1230011 (48pp), 2012.
  27. K. Szot, M. Rogala, W. Speier, Z. Klusek, A. Besmehn, and R. Waser. TiO - a prototypical memristive material. Nanotechnology, 22:254001–1 – 254001–21, June 2011.
  28. L. O. Chua. Memristor - the missing circuit element. IEEE Trans. Circuit Theory, 18:507–519, 1971.
  29. R. Williams. How we found the missing memristor. Spectrum, IEEE, 45(12):28–35, Dec 2008.
  30. D. B. Strukov, G. S. Snider, D. R. Stewart, and R. S. Williams. The missing memristor found. Nature, 453:80–83, 2008.
  31. W. Alan Doolittle, W.L. Calley, and W. Henderson. Complementary oxide memristor technology facilitating both inhibitory and excitatory synapses for potential neuromorphic computing applications. In Semiconductor Device Research Symposium, 2009. ISDRS ’09. International, pages 1–2, Dec 2009.
  32. D. J. Kim and Z. Fisk. A kondo insulating memristor. Applied Physics Letters, 101(1):–, 2012.
  33. H. Wu, K. Cai, J. Zhou, B. Li, and L. Li. Unipolar memristive switching in bulk negative temperature coefficient thermosensitive ceramics. PLoS ONE, 8:e79832, 2013.
  34. Ella Gale, Richard Mayne, Andrew Adamatzky, and Ben de Lacy Costello. Drop-coated titanium dioxide memristors. Materials Chemistry and Physics, 143:524–529, January 2014.
  35. N. M. Bashara P. H. Nielsen. The reversible voltage-induced initial resistance in the negative resistance sandwich structure. IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, 11:243–244, May 1964.
  36. W.E. Beadle. Switching properties of thin NiO films. Solid State Electronics, 7:785–797, 1964.
  37. F. Argall. Switching phenomena in titanium oxide thin films. Solid State Electronics, 11:535–541, 1968.
  38. B. Widrow. An adaptive ‘adaline’ neuron using chemical ‘memistors’. Technical report, Stanford University, 1960.
  39. Shyam Prasas Adhikari and Hyongsuk Kim. Memristor Networks, chapter Why are Memristor and Memistor Different Devices? Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2014.
  40. Leon Chua. Resistance switching memories are memristors. Applied Physics A: Materials Science & Processing, pages 765–782, 2011.
  41. Christofer Toumazou Themistoklis Prodromakis and Leon Chua. Two centuries of memristors. Nature Materials, 11:478–481, 2012.
  42. Jean-Marc Ginoux and Bruno Rossetto. Chaos, CNN, Memristors and Beyond, chapter The Singing Arc: The Oldest Memristor? World Scientific, 2013.
  43. Gaurav Gandhi, Varun Aggarwal, and Leon O. Chua. Memristor Networks, chapter The Detectors Used in the First Radios Were Memristors. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2014.
  44. Akihito Sawa. Resistive switching in transition metal oxides. Materials Today, 11:28–36, 2008.
  45. Rainer Waser and Masakazu Aono. Nanoionics-based resistive switching memories. Nature Materials, 6:833–840, 2007.
  46. Sung Hyun Jo, Ting Chang, Idongesit Ebong, Bhavitavya B. Bhadviya, Pinaki Mazumder, and Wei Lu. Nanoscale memristor device as a synapse in neuromorphic systems. Nanoletters, 10:1297–1301, 2010.
  47. Ella M Gale, Benjamin de Lacy Costello, and Andy Adamatzky. Observation and characterization of memristor current spikes and their application to neuromorphic computation. In 2012 International Conference on Numerical Analysis and Applied Mathematics (ICNAAM 2012), Kos, Greece, Sept 2012.
  48. Xin Jin, Alexander Rast, Franceson Galluppi, Sergio Davies, and Steve Furber. Implimenting spike-timing dependent plasticity on SpiNNiker neuromorphic hardware. 2010.
  49. Ella Gale, Ben de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Adamatzky. Memristor Networks, chapter Spiking in Memristor Networks. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2014.
  50. Gerard David Howard, Ella Gale, Larry Bull, Benjamin de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Adamatzky. Evolution of plastic learning in spiking networks via memristive connections. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 16:711–719, 2012.
  51. Bharathwaj Muthuswamy. Memristor based circuit chaos. IETE Technical Review, 26:1–15, 2009.
  52. Arturo Buscarino, Luigi Fortuna, Mattia Frasca, and Lucia Valentina Gambuzza. A chaotic circuit based on Hewlett-Packard memristor. Chaos, 22:023136, 2012.
  53. Bharathwaj Muthuswamy and Leon Chua. Simplest chaotic circuit. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 20:1567, 2009.
  54. Makoto Itoh and Leon Chua. Memristor oscillators. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 18:3183–3206, 2008.
  55. A. D. Rast, F. Galluppi, X. Jin, and S. B. Furber. The leaky integrate and fire neuron: a platform for synaptic model exploration on the SpiNNaker chip. 2010.
  56. Ella Gale, Ben de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Adamatzky. Boolean logic gates from a single memristor via low-level sequential logic. In Giancarlo Mauri, Alberto Dennunzio, Luca Manzoni, and Antonio E. Porreca, editors, Unconventional Computation and Natural Computation, volume 7956 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 79–89. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
  57. S. Kvatinsky, Y. Nacson, Y. Etsion, E. Friedman, A. Kolodny, and U. Weiser. Memristor-based multithreading. Computer Architecture Letters, PP(99):1–1, 2013.
  58. T.M. Taha, R. Hasan, C. Yakopcic, and M.R. McLean. Exploring the design space of specialized multicore neural processors. In Neural Networks (IJCNN), The 2013 International Joint Conference on, pages 1–8, Aug 2013.
  59. Warren Robinett, Matthew Pickett, Julien Borghetti, Qiangfei Xia, Gregory S Snider, Gilberto Medeiros-Ribeiro, and R Stanley Williams. A memristor-based nonvolatile latch circuit. Nanotechnology, 21(23):235203, 2010.
  60. Yuriy V. Pershin and Massimiliano Di Ventra. Solving mazes with memristors: A massively parallel approach. Phys. Rev. E, 84:046703, Oct 2011.
  61. Chuan Kai Kenneth Lim and T. Prodromakis. Computing motion with 3D memristive grids. arxiv, page 1303.3067v1, 2013.
  62. Ioannis Georgilas, Ella Gale, Andrew Adamatzky, and Chris Melhuish. UAV horizon tracking using memristors and cellular automata visual processing. In , editor, Advances in Autonomous Robotics, volume – of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages –. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
  63. Makoto Itoh and Leon O. Chua. Memristor cellular automata and memristor discrete-time cellular neural networks. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 19(11):3605–3656, 2009.
  64. A. Mittal and S. Swaminathan. Image stabilization using memristors. In Mechanical and Electrical Technology (ICMET), 2010 2nd International Conference on, pages 789–792, Sept 2010.
  65. Ella Gale, Ben de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Adamatzky. Design of a hybrid robot control system using memristor-model and ant-inspired based information transfer protocols. In Proceedings of Workshop Fr-Ws-09 on ‘Unconventional Approaches to Robotics and Automation Inspired by Nature’ (UARACIN) at International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 34–36, May 2013.
  66. Lidan Wang, Xiaoyan Fang, Shukai Duan, and Xiaofeng Liao. Pid controller based on memristive cmac network. Abstract and Applied Analysis, page 510238 (6 pp), 2013.
  67. M. Rivas-Pérez, A. Linares-Barranco, J. Cerdá, N. Ferrando, G. Jiménez, and A. Civit. Visual spike-based convolution processing with a cellular automata architecture. 2010.
  68. Ella Gale, Benjamin de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Adamatzky. Observation, characterization and modeling of memristor current spikes. Appl. Math. Inf. Sci., 7:1395–1403, 4,July 2013.
  69. Julien Borghetti, Gregory D. Snider, Philip J. Kuekes, J. Joshua Yang, Duncan R. Stewart, and R. Stanley Williams. ‘memristive’ switches enable ‘stateful’ logic operations via material implication. Nature, 464:873–876, 2010.
  70. Doo Seok Jeong, Herbert Schroeder, and Rainer Waser. Coexistence of bipolar and unipolar resistive switching behaviors in a Pt/TiO/Pt stack. Electrochemical and Solid State Letters, 10:G51–G53, 2007.
  71. B.J. Choi, D.S. Jeong, S.K. Kim, C.Rohde, S. Choi, J.H. Oh, H.J. Kim, C.S. Hwang, K. Szot, R. Waser, B. Reichenberg, and S. Tiedke. Resistive switching mechanism of TiO thin films grown by atomic-layer deposition. Journal of Applied Physics, 98:033715, 2005.
  72. Nadine Gergel-Hackett, Behrang Hamadani, Barbara Dunlap, John Suehle, Curt Richer, Christina Hacker, and David Gundlach. A flexible solution-processed memrister. IEEE Electron Device Letters, 30:706–708, 2009.
  73. Junggwon Yun, Kyoungah Cho, Byoungjun Park, Bae Ho Park, and Sangsig Kim. Resistance switching memory devices constructed on plastic with solution-processed titanium oxide. Journal of Materials Chemistry, 19:2082–2085, 2009.
  74. Hu Young Jeong, Jeong Yong Lee, Sung-Yool Choi, and Jeong Won Kim. Microscopic origin of bipolar resistive switching of nanocale titanium oxide thin films. Applied Physics Letters, 95:162108, 2009.
  75. Sanghee Won, Seunghee Go, Kwanwoo Lee, and Jaegab Lee. Resistive switching properties of Pt/TiO/n+-Si ReRAM for non-volatile memory application. Electronic Materials Letters, 4:29–33, 2008.
  76. Micheal Colle, Michael Buchel, and Dago M. de Leeuw. Switching and filamentary conduction in non-volatile organic memories. Organic Electronics, 7:305–312, 2006.
  77. J. C. Bernede. Polarized memory switching in MIS thin films. Thin Solid Films, 81:155–160, 1981.
  78. Kever T, U. Bottger, C. Schlindler, and R. Waser. On the origin if bistable resistive switching in metal organic charge transfer complex memory cells. Applied Physics Letters, 91:083506, 2007.
  79. Jeong Yong Lee Hu Young Jeong and Sung-Yool Choi. Interface-engineered amorphous TiO based resistive memory devices. Advanced Functional Materials, 20:3912–3917, 2010.
  80. Stefan T. Norberg, Stefan Hoffmann, Masahiro Yoshimura, and Nobuo Ishizawa. AlTioO, a new phase in the Al—TiO system. Acta Cryst. C, 61:i35–i38, 2005.
  81. E. Gale, D. Pearson, S. Kitson, A. Adamatzky, and B. de Lacy Costello. Aluminium electrodes effect the operation of titanium oxide sol-gel memristors. arXiv:1106.6293v2, 2011.
  82. K. Michelakis, T. Prodromakis, and C. Toumazou. Cost-effective fabrication of nanoscale electrode memristors with reproducible electrical response. Micro Nano Letters, IET, 5(2):91–94, April 2010.
  83. Kyung-Hyun Choi, M.N. Awais, Hyung Chan Kim, and Yang Hui Doh. Cost-effective printed memristor fabrication and analysis. In Cellular Nanoscale Networks and Their Applications (CNNA), 2012 13th International Workshop on, pages 1–4, Aug 2012.
  84. Jing Wu and Richard L. McCreery. Solid-state electrochemistry in molecule/TiO molecular heterojunctions as the basis of the TiO “memristor”. Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 156:P29–P37, 2009.
  85. Rainer Waser, Tudor Baiatu, and Karl-Heinz Härdtl. dc electrical degradation of perovskite-type titanates: I, ceramics. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, 73(6):1645–1653, 1990.
  86. Krzysztof Szot, Wolfgang Speier, Gustav Bihlmayer, and Rainer Waser. Switching the electrical resistance of individual dislocations in single-crystalline SrTiO. Nature Materials, 5:312–320, 2006.
  87. J. Joshua Yang, Feng Miao, Matthew D. Pickett, Douglas A. A. Ohlberg, Duncan R. Stewart, Chun Ning Lao, and R. Stanley Williams. The mechanism of electroforming of metal oxide memristive switches. Nanotechnology, 20:215201–1 – 215201–9, 2009.
  88. DH Kwon, J-M Jeon, JH Jang, KM Kim, CS Hwang, and M Kim. Direct observation of conducting paths in TiO thin film by transmission electron microscopy. Microscopy and Microanalysis, null:996–997, 7 2009.
  89. Feng Miao, J. Joshua Yang, Julien Borghetti, Gilberto Medeiros, and R. Stanley Williams. Observation of two resistance switching modes in TiO memristive devices electroformed at low current. Nanotechnology, 22:254007 (7pp), 2011.
  90. Julien Borghetti, Dmitri B. Strukov, Matthew D. Pickett, J. Joshua Yang, and Duncan R. Stewart. Electrical transport and thermometry of electroformed titanium dioxide memristive switches. Journal of Applied Physics, 106:125504 (5pp), 2009.
  91. K. Szot, W. Speier, R. Carius, U. Zastrow, and W. Beyer. Localized metallic conductivity and self-healing during thermal reduction of SrTiO. Phys. Rev. Lett., 88:075508, Feb 2002.
  92. Daniele Ielmini, Federico Nardi, and Carlo Cagli. Universal reset characteristics of unipolar and bipolar metal-oxide RRAM. IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, 58:3246–3253, 2011.
  93. L.A. Bursill and B.G. Hyde. Crystallographic shear in the higher titanium oxides: Structure, texture, mechanisms and thermodynamics. Progress in Solid State Chemistry, 7(0):177 – 253, 1972.
  94. L. Liborio and N. Harrison. Thermodynamics of oxygen defective Magneli phases in rutile: A first principles study. Phys. Rev. B, 77:104104, 2008.
  95. Feng Zhang, Xiaoyan Gan, Xiaomin Li, Liang Wu, Xiangdong Gao, Renkui Zheng, Yong He, Xinjun Liu, and Rui Yang. Realization of recitifying and resistive switching behaviors of TiO nanorod arrays for nonvolatile memory. Electrochemical and Solid-State Letters, 14:H422–H425, 2011.
  96. Deok-Hwang Kwon, Kyung Min Kim, Jae Hyuck Jang, Jong Meyong Jeon, Min Hwan Lee, Gun Hwan Kim, Xiang-Shu Li, Gyeong-Su Park, Bora Lee, Seungwu Han, Miyoung Kim, and Cheol Seong Hwang. Atomic structure of conducting nanofilaments in TiO resistive switching memory. Nature Nanotechnology, 5:148–153, 2010.
  97. J.S. Lee, S.B. Lee, S.H. Chang, L.G. Gao, B.S. Kang, M.-L. Lee, C.J. Kim, T.W. Noh, and B. Kahng. Scaling theory for unipilar resistance switching. Physical Review Letters, 105:205701–1:205701–4, 2010.
  98. Seul Ji Song, Jun Yeong Seok, Jung Ho Yoon, Kyung Min Kim, Gun Hwan Kim, Min Hwan Lee, and Cheol Seong Hwang. Real-time identification of the evolution of conducting nano-filaments in TiO thin film ReRAM. Scientific Reports, 3:3443, 2013.
  99. L. Niemeyer, L. Pietronero, and H.J. Wiesmass. Fractal dimension of dielectric breakdown. Physical Review Letters, 52:1033–1036, 1983.
  100. John Paul Strachan, Matthew D. Pickett, J. Joshua Yang, Shaul Aloni, A. L. David Kilcoyne, Gilberto Medeiros-Ribeiro, and R. Stanley Williams. Direct identification of the conducting channels in a functioning memristive device. Advanced Materials, 22:3573–3577, 2012.
  101. M. J. Rozenberg, I. H. Inoue, and M. J. Sánchez. Strong electron correlation effects in nonvolatile electronic memory devices. Applied Physics Letters, 88(3):–, 2006.
  102. ISCAS. The mythology of the memristor,, 2010.
  103. Ella Gale. The memory-conservation theory of memristance. In Proceedings of the 16th UKSim-AMSS International Conference of Modelling and Simulation (UKSIM2014), pages 598–603, 2014.
  104. R. Stanley Williams. Aftermath of Finding the Memristor. In A. Adamatzky and et al., editors, Chaos, CNN, Memristors and Beyond: A Festschrift for Leon Chua (With DVD-ROM, Composed by Eleonora Bilotta). Edited by Adamatzky Andrew et al. Published by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2013. ISBN #9789814434805, pp. 490-493, pages 490–493, January 2013.
  105. Dmitri B. Strukov and R. Stanley Williams. Exponetial ionic drift: fast switching and low volatility of thin-film memristors. Applied Physics A, 94:515–519, 2009.
  106. Yogesh N. Joglekar and Stephen J. Wolf. The elusive memristor: properties of basic electrical circuits. Eur. J. Phys., 30:661–675, 2009.
  107. Z. Biolek, D. Biolek, and V. Biolkova. SPICE model of memristor with nonlinear dopant drift. Radioengineering, 18:210–214, 2009.
  108. T. Prodromakis, B. P. Peh, C. Papavassiliou, and C. Toumazou. A versatile memristor model with non-linear dopant kinetics. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, 30:3099–3105, 2011.
  109. Fernando Corinto and Alon Ascoli. A boundary condition-based approach to the modeling of memristor nanostructures. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 59:2713–2725, 2012.
  110. Chris Yakopcic, Tarek M. Taha, Guru Subramanyam, Robinson E. Pino, and Stanley Rogers. A memristor device model. IEEE Electron Device Letters, 32:1436–1438, 2011.
  111. Ella Gale. Uniform and peice-wise uniform fields in memristor models. arXiv:1404.5581v2, 2014.
  112. Paul Meuffels and Rohit Soni. Fundamental issues and problems in the realization of memristors. arXiv, page 207.7319v1, 2012.
  113. Stan Williams. Communication Relating to Brief Communication Arising Discussions.
  114. G.E. Pazienza and J. Albo-Canals. Teaching memristors to EE undergraduate students [class notes]. IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine, 11:36–44, 2011.
  115. J. Albo-Canals and G.E. Pazienza. A brief analysis of the main SPICE models of the memristor. In Proceedings of 19th IEEE Int. Conf. Electronics, Circuits, and Systems (ICECS 2012), pages 861–864, 2012.
  116. Xuliang Zhang, Zhangeai Huang, and Juebang Yu. Memristor model for SPICE. IEICE Trans. Electron., E93-C:355–360, 2010.
  117. P.S. Georgiou, S.N. Yaliraki, E.M. Drakakis, and M. Barahona. Quantitative measure of hysteresis for memristors through explicit dynamics. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 468:2210–2229, August 2012.
  118. S. Kvatinsky, N. Wald, G. Satat, E. G. Friedman, A. Kolodny, and U. C. Weiser. Memristor-based material implication (IMPLY) logic: Design principles and methodologies. IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI), PP:1–13, 2013.
  119. Matthew D. Pickett, Dmitri B. Strukov, Julien L. Borghetti, J. Joshua Yang, Gregory S. Snider. Duncun R. Stewart, and R. Stanley Williams. Switching dynamics in titanium dioxide memristive devices. Journal of Applied Physics, 109:074508, 2009.
  120. Shahar Kvatinsky, Eby G. Friedman, Avinoam Kolodny, and Uri. C Weiser. TEAM: ThrEshold adaptive memristor model. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 60:222111–, 2013.
  121. E. Lehtonen and M. Laiho. CNN using memristors for neighborhood connections. In Cellular Nanoscale Networks and Their Applications (CNNA), 2010 12th International Workshop on, pages 1–4, Feb 2010.
  122. Ioannis Vourkas and Georgios Ch. Sirakoulis. A novel design and modeling paradigm for memristor-based crossbar circuits. IEEE Trans. Nanotechnology, 11:1151–1159, 2012.
  123. Ioannis Vourkas, Athanasios Batsos, and Georgios Ch. Sirakoulis. SPICE modeling of nonlinear memristive behavior. International Journal of Circuit Theory and Applications, pages n/a–n/a, 2013.
  124. C. Yakopcic, T.M. Taha, G. Subramanyam, and R.E. Pino. Generalized memristive device SPICE model and its application in circuit design. Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 32(8):1201–1214, Aug 2013.
  125. R.Stanley Williams and MatthewD. Pickett. The art and science of constructing a memristor model. In Ronald Tetzlaff, editor, Memristors and Memristive Systems, pages 93–104. Springer New York, 2014.
  126. Leon O. Chua and Sung Mo Kang. Memristive devices and systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 64:209–223, 1976.
  127. Shyam Prasad Adhikari, Hyongsuk Kim Maheshwar Pd. Sah, and Leon O. Chua. Three fingerprints of memristor. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 60:3008–3021, November 2013.
  128. Massimiliano Di Ventra and Yuriy V Pershin. On the physical properties of memristive, memcapacitive and meminductive systems. Nanotechnology, 24(25):255201, 2013.
  129. Yuriy V. Pershin and Massimiliano Di Ventra. Memory effects in complex materials and nanoscale systems. Advances in Physics, 60:145–227, 2011.
  130. Ella M Gale, Benjamin de Lacy Costello, and Andy Adamatzky. The effect of electrode size on memristor properties: An experimental and theoretical study. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Electronics Design, Systems and Applications (ICEDSA 2012), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, November 2012.
  131. I. Valov, E. Linn, S. Tappertzhofen, S. Schmelzer, J. van den Hurk, F. Lentz, and R. Waser. Nanobatteries in redox-based resistive switches require extension of memristor theory. Nature Communications, 4:1771 (9pp), 2013.
  132. Blaise Mouttet. The memristor and scientific method. viXra:1205.0004, 2012.
  133. H.-S.P. Wong, H.-Y. Lee, S. Yu, Y.-S. Chen, Y. Wu, P.-S. Chen, B. Lee, F.T. Chen, and M.-J. Tsai. Metal-oxide RRAM. Proc. IEEE, 100:1951–1970, 2012.
  134. J. L. Tedesco, L. Stephey, M. Hernandez-Mora amd C. A. Richter, and N. Gergel-Hackett. Switching mechanisms in flexible solution-processed TiO memristors. Nanotechnology, 23:305206 (7pp), 2012.
  135. Nathan R. McDonald, Robinson E. Pino, Peter J. Rozwood, and Bryant T. Wysocki. Analysis of dynamic linear and non-linear memristor device models for emerging neuromorphic computing hardware design. In IJCNN, pages 1–5, 2010.
  136. S. Hamdioui, M. Taouil, and N.Z.B. Haron. Testing open defects in memristor-based memories. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 99:TC.2013.206, October 2013.
  137. Seungjun Kim, Hu Young Jeong, Sung Kyu Kim, Sung-Yool Choi, and Keon Jae Lee. Flexible memristive memory array on plastic substrates. Nano Letters, 11(12):5438–5442, 2011.
  138. Ella M Gale, Benjamin de Lacy Costello, and Andy Adamatzky. Filamentary extension of the Mem-Con theory of memristance and its application to titanium dioxide Sol-Gel memristors. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Electronics Design, Systems and Applications (ICEDSA 2012), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, November 2012.
  139. Y. Ho, G.M. Huang, and P. Li. Dynamical properties and design analysis for nonvolatile memristor memories. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, 58:724–736, 2011.
  140. K.-H. Kim, S. Gaba, D. Wheeler, J.M. Cruz-Albrecht, T. Hussain, N. Srinivasa, and W. Lu. A functional hybrid memristor crossbar-array/cmos system for data storage and neuromorphic applications. Nano Lett., 12:389–395, 2012.
  141. Pascal O Vontobel, Warren Robinett, Philip J Kuekes, Duncan R Stewart, Joseph Straznicky, and R Stanley Williams. Writing to and reading from a nano-scale crossbar memory based on memristors. Nanotechnology, 20(42):425204, 2009.
  142. S. Kannan, J. Rajendran, O. Sinanoglu, and R. Karri. Sneak path testing of memristor-based memories. In Proceedings of the 2013 26 International Conference on VLSI Design and the 12 International Conference on Embedded Systems, pages 386–391, 2013.
  143. Harika Manem, Garrett S. Rose, Xiaoli He, and Wei Wang. Design considerations for variation tolerant multilevel cmos/nano memristor memory. In Proceedings of the 20th Symposium on Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI, GLSVLSI ’10, pages 287–292, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM.
  144. Chul-Moon Jung, Jun-Myung Choi, and Kyeong-Sik Min. Two-step write scheme for reducing sneak-path leakage in complementary memristor array. Nanotechnology, IEEE Transactions on, 11(3):611–618, May 2012.
  145. M. A. Zidan, H. Fahmy, A. Eltawil, F. Kurdahi, and K. N. Salama. Memristor multi-port readout: A closed-form solution for sneak-paths. IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, 13:274–282, 2014.
  146. M.S. Qureshi, W. Yi, G. Medeiros-Ribeiro, and R.S. Williams. AC sense technique for memristor crossbar. Electronics Letters, 48:757–758(1), June 2012.
  147. M. A. Zidan, H. Fahmy, M.H Hossein, and K. N. Salama. Memristor based memory: The sneak paths problem and solutions. Microelectronics journal, 44:176–183, 2013.
  148. V. Erokhin, T. Berzina, and M. P. Fontana. Hybrid electronic device based on polyaniline-polyethylenoxide junction. J. Appl. Phys., 97:064501, 2005.
  149. Victor Erokhin, Almut Schuz, and M.P. Fontana. Organic memristor and bio-inspired information processing. International Journal of Unconventional Computing, 6:15–32, 2009.
  150. Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell. Principia Mathematica: volume one, pages 394–508. Marchant Books, 1910.
  151. Ella Gale, Ben de Lacy Costello, and Andrew Admatzky. Is spiking logic the route to memristor-based computers? In 2013 International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), pages 297–300, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 8-11 December 2013. IEEE.
  152. Ioannis Vourkas and Georgios Ch. Sirakoulis. Memristor-based combinational circuits: A design methodology for encoders/decoders. Microelectronics Journal, 45:59–70, 2014.
  153. Eero Lehtonen, JussiH. Poikonen, and Mika Laiho. Memristive stateful logic. In Andrew Adamatzky and Leon Chua, editors, Memristor Networks, pages 603–623. Springer International Publishing, 2014.
  154. Joao Capela Duarte, Ernesto Ventura Martins, and Luis Nero Alves. Frequency characterisation of memristive devices. In 2013 European Conference on Circuit Theory and Design (ECCTD), pages 1–4, Dresden, Germany, 8-12 September 2013. IEEE.
  155. Joao Capela Duarte, Ernesto Ventura Martins, and Luis Nero Alves. Amplitude characterization of memristive devices. In 2013 International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), pages 45–49, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 8-11 December 2013. IEEE.
  156. Z.Biolek D. Biolek and V.Biolkova. Interpreting area of pinched hysteresis loop. Electronics Letters, 50:74–75, Jan 2014.
  157. T.A. Wey and W.D. Jemison. Variable gain amplifier circuit using titanium dioxide memristors. IET Circuits and Systems, 5:59–65, 2011.
  158. Omid Kavehei, Said Al-Sarawi, Kyong-Rok Cho, Kamram Eshraghian, and Derek Abbott. An analytical approach for memristive nanoarchitectures. IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, 11:374–385, 2012.
Comments 0
Request Comment
You are adding the first comment!
How to quickly get a good reply:
  • Give credit where it’s due by listing out the positive aspects of a paper before getting into which changes should be made.
  • Be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements.
  • Your comment should inspire ideas to flow and help the author improves the paper.

The better we are at sharing our knowledge with each other, the faster we move forward.
The feedback must be of minimum 40 characters and the title a minimum of 5 characters
Add comment
Loading ...
This is a comment super asjknd jkasnjk adsnkj
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters
The feedback must be of minumum 40 characters

You are asking your first question!
How to quickly get a good answer:
  • Keep your question short and to the point
  • Check for grammar or spelling errors.
  • Phrase it like a question
Test description