Progress and Benchmark of Spiking Neuron Devices and Circuits

• Published in: Advanced intelligent systems 2021-08, Vol.3 (8), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Liang, Fu-Xiang, Wang, I-Ting, Hou, Tuo-Hung
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Algorithms; Analog circuits; Artificial intelligence; Benchmarks; CMOS; Deep learning; Efficiency; Hardware; in-memory computing; Memory devices; Neural networks; neuromorphic computing; Random access memory; Semiconductors; Spiking; spiking neurons; Transistors
• ISSN: 2640-4567; 2640-4567
• DOI: 10.1002/aisy.202100007

The sustainability of ever more sophisticated artificial intelligence relies on the continual development of highly energy‐efficient and compact computing hardware that mimics the biological neural networks. Recently, the neural firing properties have been widely explored in various spiking neuron devices, which could emerge as the fundamental building blocks of future neuromorphic/in‐memory computing hardware. By leveraging the intrinsic device characteristics, the device‐based spiking neuron has the potential advantage of a compact circuit area for implementing neural networks with high density and high parallelism. However, a comprehensive benchmark that considers not only the device but also the peripheral circuit necessary for realizing complete neural functions is still lacking. Herein, the recent progress of emerging spiking neuron devices and circuits is reviewed. By implementing peripheral analog circuits for supporting various spiking neuron devices in the in‐memory computing architecture, the advantages and challenges in area and energy efficiency are discussed by benchmarking various technologies. A small or even no membrane capacitor, a self‐reset property, and a high spiking frequency are highly desirable. To pursue better area and power efficiency in neuromorphic computing hardware, device innovations in both synapse and neuron circuits are important. Herein, several neuron circuits based on the phase‐change memory, magnetoresistance memory, ferroelectric field‐effect transistor, threshold switching device, and silicon‐on‐insulator field‐effect transistor are reviewed and their performance is compared. The prospective toward future development is also highlighted.