A memristor (/ˈmɛmrɪstər/; a portmanteau of memory resistor) is a non-linear two-terminal electrical component relating electric charge and magnetic flux

linkage. It was described and named in 1971 by Leon Chua, completing a theoretical quartet of fundamental electrical components which comprises also
the resistor, capacitor and inductor.[1] No physical memristor component has yet been demonstrated.

Chua and Kang later generalized the concept to memristive systems.[2] Such a system comprises a circuit, of multiple conventional components, which
mimicks key properties of the ideal memristor component and is also commonly referred to as a memristor. Several such memristor system technologies
have been developed, notably ReRAM.

The identification of genuine memristive properties in both theoretical and practical devices has attracted controversy.

The memristor as a fundamental electrical

component[edit]

Conceptual symmetries of resistor, capacitor, inductor, and memristor.

Chua in his 1971 paper identified a theoretical symmetry between the non-linear resistor (voltage vs. current), non-linear capacitor (voltage vs. charge), and
non-linear inductor (magnetic flux linkage vs. current). From this symmetry he inferred the characteristics of a fourth fundamental non-linear circuit element,
linking magnetic flux and charge, which he called the memristor. In contrast to a linear (or non-linear) resistor the memristor has a dynamic relationship
between current and voltage including a memory of past voltages or currents. Other scientists had proposed dynamic memory resistors such as
the memistor of Bernard Widrow, but Chua introduced a mathematical generality.

Derivation and characteristics[edit]

The memristor was originally defined in terms of a non-linear functional relationship between magnetic flux linkage Φm(t) and the amount of electric charge
that has flowed, q(t):[1]

The magnetic flux linkage, Φm, is generalized from the circuit characteristic of an inductor. It does not represent a magnetic field here. Its physical
meaning is discussed below. The symbol Φm may be regarded as the integral of voltage over time.[3]

In the relationship between Φm and q, the derivative of one with respect to the other depends on the value of one or the other, and so each memristor is
characterized by its memristance function describing the charge-dependent rate of change of flux with charge.

Substituting the flux as the time integral of the voltage, and charge as the time integral of current, the more convenient forms are;

To relate the memristor to the resistor, capacitor, and inductor, it is helpful to isolate the term M(q), which characterizes the device, and
write it as a differential equation.

Characteristic property
Device Differential equation
(units)

Resistor (R) Resistance (V / A, or ohm, Ω) R = dV / dI

Capacitor (C) Capacitance (C / V, or farad) C = dq / dV

 Inductor (L) Inductance (Wb / A, or henry) L = dΦm / dI

Memristor
Memristance (Wb / C, or ohm) M = dΦm / dq
(M)

The above table covers all meaningful ratios of differentials of I, Q, Φm, and V. No device can relate dI to dq, or dΦm to dV, because I is
the derivative of Q and Φm is the integral of V.

It can be inferred from this that memristance is charge-dependent resistance. If M(q(t)) is a constant, then we obtain Ohm's Law R(t)
= V(t)/I(t). If M(q(t)) is nontrivial, however, the equation is not equivalent because q(t) and M(q(t)) can vary with time. Solving for voltage
as a function of time produces

This equation reveals that memristance defines a linear relationship between current and voltage, as long as M does not vary with
charge. Nonzero current implies time varying charge. Alternating current, however, may reveal the linear dependence in circuit
operation by inducing a measurable voltage without net charge movement—as long as the maximum change in q does not
cause much change in M.

Furthermore, the memristor is static if no current is applied. If I(t) = 0, we find V(t) = 0 and M(t) is constant. This is the essence of
the memory effect.

Analogously, we can define a   as menductance.[1]

The power consumption characteristic recalls that of a resistor, I2R.

As long as M(q(t)) varies little, such as under alternating current, the memristor will appear as a constant resistor.
If M(q(t)) increases rapidly, however, current and power consumption will quickly stop.

M(q) is physically restricted to be positive for all values of q (assuming the device is passive and does not
become superconductive at some q). A negative value would mean that it would perpetually supply energy when
operated with alternating current.

Modelling and validation[edit]

In order to understand nature of memristor function, some knowledge of fundamental circuit theoretic concepts is
useful, starting with the concept of device modelling.[4]

Engineers and scientists seldom analyze a physical system in its original form. Instead, they construct a model which
approximates the behaviour of the system. By analyzing the behaviour of the model, they hope to predict the
behaviour of the actual system. The primary reason for constructing models is that physical systems are usually too
complex to be amenable to a practical analysis.

In the 20th century, work was done on devices where researchers did not recognize the memristive characteristics.
This has raised the suggestion that such devices should be recognised as memristors.[4] Pershin and Di Ventra[5] have
proposed a test that can help to resolve some of the long-standing controversies about whether an ideal memristor
does actually exist or is a purely mathematical concept.

The rest of this article primarily addresses memristors as related to ReRAM devices, since the majority of work since
2008 has been concentrated in this area.

Superconducting memristor component[edit]

Dr. Paul Penfield, in a 1974 MIT technical report [6] mentions the memristor in connection with Josephson junctions.
This was an early use of the word "memristor" in the context of a circuit device.

One of the terms in the current through a Josephson junction is of the form:

where   is a constant based on the physical superconducting materials,   is the

voltage across the junction and   is the current through the junction.
Through the late 20th century, research regarding this phase-dependent conductance in Josephson junctions
was carried out.[7][8][9][10] A more comprehensive approach to extracting this phase-dependent conductance
appeared with Peotta and DiVentra's seminal paper in 2014.[11]

Memristor circuits[edit]
Due to the practical difficulty of studying the ideal memristor, we will discuss other electrical devices which can
be modelled using memristors. For a mathematical description of a memristive device (systems), see Theory.

A discharge tube can be modelled as a memristive device, with resistance being a function of the number of

conduction electrons  .[2]

 is the voltage across the discharge tube,   is the current flowing through it

and   is the number of conduction electrons. A simple memristance function is 

.   and   are parameters depending on the dimensions of the

tube and the gas fillings. An experimental identification of memristive behaviour is the "pinched

hysteresis loop" in the   plane. For an experiment that shows such a characteristic for a
common discharge tube, see "A physical memristor Lissajous figure" (YouTube). The video also
illustrates how to understand deviations in the pinched hysteresis characteristics of physical memristors.
[12][13]

Thermistors can be modelled as memristive devices.[13]

 is a material constant,   is the absolute body temperature of the

thermistor,   is the ambient temperature (both temperatures in Kelvin), 

 denotes the cold temperature resistance at  ,   is the

heat capacitance and   is the dissipation constant for the thermistor.

A fundamental phenomenon that has hardly been studied is memristive behaviour in pn-
junctions.[14] The memristor plays a crucial role in mimicking the charge storage effect in the diode
base, and is also responsible for the conductivity modulation phenomenon (that is so important
during forward transients).

Criticisms[edit]
In 2008, a team at HP Labs claimed to have found Chua's missing memristor based on an
analysis of a thin film of titanium dioxide thus connecting the operation of ReRAM devices to the
memristor concept. According to the HP labs, the memristor would operate in the following way:
the memristor's electrical resistance is not constant but depends on the history of current that had
previously flowed through the device, i.e., its present resistance depends on how much electric
charge has flowed in what direction through it in the past; the device remembers its history—the
so-called non-volatility property.[15] When the electric power supply is turned off, the memristor
remembers its most recent resistance until it is turned on again.[16][17]

The HP result was published in the scientific journal Nature.[16][18] Following this claim, Leon Chua
has argued that the memristor definition could be generalized to cover all forms of two-terminal
non-volatile memory devices based on resistance switching effects.[15] Chua also argued that the
memristor is the oldest known circuit element, with its effects predating the resistor, capacitor,
and inductor.[19] There are, however, some serious doubts as to whether a genuine memristor can
actually exist in physical reality.[20][21][22][23][24] Additionally, some experimental evidence contradicts
Chua's generalization since a non-passive nanobattery effect is observable in resistance
switching memory.[25] A simple test has been proposed by Pershin and Di Ventra[5] to analyse
whether such an ideal or generic memristor does actually exist or is a purely mathematical
concept. Up to now, there seems to be no experimental resistance switching device (ReRAM)
which can pass the test.[5][26]
These devices are intended for applications in nanoelectronic memories, computer logic,
and neuromorphic/neuromemristive computer architectures.[27][28][29] In 2013, Hewlett-Packard CTO
Martin Fink suggested that memristor memory may become commercially available as early as
2018.[30] In March 2012, a team of researchers from HRL Laboratories and the University of
Michigan announced the first functioning memristor array built on a CMOS chip.[31]

An array of 17 purpose-built oxygen-depleted titanium dioxide memristors built at HP Labs, imaged

by an atomic force microscope. The wires are about 50 nm, or 150 atoms, wide.[32] Electric

current through the memristors shifts the oxygen vacancies, causing a gradual and persistent

change in electrical resistance.[33]

According to the original 1971 definition, the memristor was the fourth fundamental circuit
element, forming a non-linear relationship between electric charge and magnetic flux linkage. In
2011, Chua argued for a broader definition that included all 2-terminal non-volatile memory
devices based on resistance switching.[15] Williams argued that MRAM, phase-change
memory and ReRAM were memristor technologies.[34] Some researchers argued that biological
structures such as blood[35] and skin[36][37] fit the definition. Others argued that the memory device
under development by HP Labs and other forms of ReRAM were not memristors, but rather part
of a broader class of variable-resistance systems,[38] and that a broader definition of memristor is a
scientifically unjustifiable land grab that favored HP's memristor patents.[39]

In 2011, Meuffels and Schroeder noted that one of the early memristor papers included a
mistaken assumption regarding ionic conduction.[40] In 2012, Meuffels and Soni discussed some
fundamental issues and problems in the realization of memristors.[20] They indicated inadequacies
in the electrochemical modelling presented in the Nature article "The missing memristor
found"[16] because the impact of concentration polarization effects on the behavior of
metal−TiO2−x−metal structures under voltage or current stress was not considered. This critique
was referred to by Valov et al.[25] in 2013.

In a kind of thought experiment, Meuffels and Soni[20] furthermore revealed a severe

inconsistency: If a current-controlled memristor with the so-called non-volatility property[15] exists
in physical reality, its behavior would violate Landauer's principle of the minimum amount of
energy required to change "information" states of a system. This critique was finally adopted
by Di Ventra and Pershin[21] in 2013.

Within this context, Meuffels and Soni[20] pointed to a fundamental thermodynamic principle: Non-
volatile information storage requires the existence of free-energy barriers that separate the
distinct internal memory states of a system from each other; otherwise, one would be faced with
an "indifferent" situation, and the system would arbitrarily fluctuate from one memory state to
another just under the influence of thermal fluctuations. When unprotected against thermal
fluctuations, the internal memory states exhibit some diffusive dynamics, which causes state
degradation.[21] The free-energy barriers must therefore be high enough to ensure a low bit-error
probability of bit operation. [41] Consequently, there is always a lower limit of energy requirement –
depending on the required bit-error probability – for intentionally changing a bit value in any
memory device.[41][42]

In the general concept of memristive system the defining equations are (see Theory):

where u(t) is an input signal, and y(t) is an output signal. The vector x represents a set

of n state variables describing the different internal memory states of the device. ẋ is the
time-dependent rate of change of the state vector x with time.

When one wants to go beyond mere curve fitting and aims at a real physical modeling of
non-volatile memory elements, e.g., resistive random-access memory devices, one has to
keep an eye on the aforementioned physical correlations. To check the adequacy of the
proposed model and its resulting state equations, the input signal u(t) can be superposed
with a stochastic term ξ(t), which takes into account the existence of inevitable thermal
fluctuations. The dynamic state equation in its general form then finally reads:

where ξ(t) is, e.g., white Gaussian current or voltage noise. On base of an analytical

or numerical analysis of the time-dependent response of the system towards noise,
a decision on the physical validity of the modeling approach can be made, e.g.,
would the system be able to retain its memory states in power-off mode?

Such an analysis was performed by Di Ventra and Pershin[21] with regard to the

genuine current-controlled memristor. As the proposed dynamic state equation
provides no physical mechanism enabling such a memristor to cope with inevitable
thermal fluctuations, a current-controlled memristor would erratically change its
state in course of time just under the influence of current noise.[21][43] Di Ventra and
Pershin[21] thus concluded that memristors whose resistance (memory) states
depend solely on the current or voltage history would be unable to protect their
memory states against unavoidable Johnson–Nyquist noise and permanently suffer
from information loss, a so-called "stochastic catastrophe". A current-controlled
memristor can thus not exist as a solid-state device in physical reality.

The above-mentioned thermodynamic principle furthermore implies that the

operation of 2-terminal non-volatile memory devices (e.g. "resistance-switching"
memory devices (ReRAM)) cannot be associated with the memristor concept, i.e.,
such devices cannot by itself remember their current or voltage history. Transitions
between distinct internal memory or resistance states are of probabilistic nature.
The probability for a transition from state {i} to state {j} depends on the height of the
free-energy barrier between both states. The transition probability can thus be
influenced by suitably driving the memory device, i.e., by "lowering" the free-energy
barrier for the transition {i} → {j} by means of, for example, an externally applied
bias.

A "resistance switching" event can simply be enforced by setting the external bias to
a value above a certain threshold value. This is the trivial case, i.e., the free-energy
barrier for the transition {i} → {j} is reduced to zero. In case one applies biases
below the threshold value, there is still a finite probability that the device will switch
in course of time (triggered by a random thermal fluctuation), but – as one is dealing
with probabilistic processes – it is impossible to predict when the switching event
will occur. That is the basic reason for the stochastic nature of all observed
resistance-switching (ReRAM) processes. If the free-energy barriers are not high
enough, the memory device can even switch without having to do anything.

When a 2-terminal non-volatile memory device is found to be in a distinct resistance

state {j}, there exists therefore no physical one-to-one relationship between its
present state and its foregoing voltage history. The switching behavior of individual
non-volatile memory devices thus cannot be described within the mathematical
framework proposed for memristor/memristive systems.

An extra thermodynamic curiosity arises from the definition that

memristors/memristive devices should energetically act like resistors. The
instantaneous electrical power entering such a device is completely dissipated
as Joule heat to the surrounding, so no extra energy remains in the system after it
has been brought from one resistance state xi to another one xj. Thus, the internal
energy of the memristor device in state xi, U(V, T, xi), would be the same as in
state xj, U(V, T, xj), even though these different states would give rise to different
device's resistances, which itself must be caused by physical alterations of the
device's material.

Other researchers noted that memristor models based on the assumption of

linear ionic drift do not account for asymmetry between set time (high-to-low
resistance switching) and reset time (low-to-high resistance switching) and do not
provide ionic mobility values consistent with experimental data. Non-linear ionic-drift
models have been proposed to compensate for this deficiency.[44]

A 2014 article from researchers of ReRAM concluded that Strukov's (HP's)

initial/basic memristor modelling equations do not reflect the actual device physics
well, whereas subsequent (physics-based) models such as Pickett's model or
Menzel's ECM model (Menzel is a co-author of that article) have adequate
predictability, but are computationally prohibitive. As of 2014, the search continues
for a model that balances these issues; the article identifies Chang's and Yakopcic's
models as potentially good compromises.[45]

Martin Reynolds, an electrical engineering analyst with research outfit Gartner,

commented that while HP was being sloppy in calling their device a memristor,
critics were being pedantic in saying that it was not a memristor.[46]

In the article "The Missing Memristor has Not been Found", published in Scientific
Reports in 2015 by Vongehr and Meng,[23] it was shown that the real memristor
defined in 1971 is not possible without using magnetic induction. This was illustrated
by constructing a mechanical analog of the memristor and then analytically showing
that the mechanical memristor cannot be constructed without using an inertial mass.
As it is well known that the mechanical equivalent of an electrical inductor is mass, it
proves that memristors are not possible without using magnetic induction. Thus, it
can be argued that the variable-resistance devices, such as the ReRAMs, and the
conceptual memristors may have no equivalence at all.[23][47]

Experimental tests for

memristors[edit]
Chua suggested experimental tests to determine if a device may properly be
categorized as a memristor:[2]

 The Lissajous curve in the voltage-current plane is a pinched hysteresis loop

when driven by any bipolar periodic voltage or current without respect to
initial conditions.
 The area of each lobe of the pinched hysteresis loop shrinks as the
frequency of the forcing signal increases.
 As the frequency tends to infinity, the hysteresis loop degenerates to a
straight line through the origin, whose slope depends on the amplitude and
shape of the forcing signal.
According to Chua[48][49] all resistive switching memories
including ReRAM, MRAM and phase-change memory meet these criteria and are
memristors. However, the lack of data for the Lissajous curves over a range of initial
conditions or over a range of frequencies complicates assessments of this claim.

Experimental evidence shows that redox-based resistance memory (ReRAM)

includes a nanobattery effect that is contrary to Chua's memristor model. This
indicates that the memristor theory needs to be extended or corrected to enable
accurate ReRAM modeling. [25]

Theory of memristor
systems[edit]
In 2008 researchers from HP Labs introduced a model for a memristance function
based on thin films of titanium dioxide.[16] For RON ≪ ROFF the memristance function
was determined to be

where ROFF represents the high resistance state, RON represents the low

resistance state, μv represents the mobility of dopants in the thin film,
and D represents the film thickness. The HP Labs group noted that "window
functions" were necessary to compensate for differences between
experimental measurements and their memristor model due to non-linear
ionic drift and boundary effects.

Operation as a switch[edit]
For some memristors, applied current or voltage causes substantial change
in resistance. Such devices may be characterized as switches by
investigating the time and energy that must be spent to achieve a desired
change in resistance. This assumes that the applied voltage remains
constant. Solving for energy dissipation during a single switching event
reveals that for a memristor to switch from Ron to Roff in time Ton to Toff, the
charge must change by ΔQ = Qon−Qoff.

Substituting V = I(q)M(q), and then ∫dq/V = ∆Q/V for constant VTo

produces the final expression. This power characteristic differs
fundamentally from that of a metal oxide semiconductor transistor,
which is capacitor-based. Unlike the transistor, the final state of the
memristor in terms of charge does not depend on bias voltage.

The type of memristor described by Williams ceases to be ideal after

switching over its entire resistance range, creating hysteresis, also
called the "hard-switching regime".[16] Another kind of switch would
have a cyclic M(q) so that each off-on event would be followed by
an on-off event under constant bias. Such a device would act as a
memristor under all conditions, but would be less practical.

Memristive systems[edit]
In the more general concept of an n-th order memristive system the
defining equations are

where u(t) is an input signal, y(t) is an output signal, the

vector x represents a set of n state variables describing the
device, and g and f are continuous functions. For a current-
controlled memristive system the signal u(t) represents the
current signal i(t) and the signal y(t) represents the voltage
signal v(t). For a voltage-controlled memristive system the
signal u(t) represents the voltage signal v(t) and the signal y(t)
represents the current signal i(t).

The pure memristor is a particular case of these equations,

namely when x depends only on charge (x = q) and since the
charge is related to the current via the time derivative
dq/dt = i(t). Thus for pure memristors f (i.e. the rate of change of
the state) must be equal or proportional to the current i(t) .

Pinched hysteresis[edit]
 Example of pinched hysteresis curve, V versus I

One of the resulting properties of memristors and memristive

systems is the existence of a pinched hysteresis effect.[50] For a
current-controlled memristive system, the input u(t) is the
current i(t), the output y(t) is the voltage v(t), and the slope of
the curve represents the electrical resistance. The change in
slope of the pinched hysteresis curves demonstrates switching
between different resistance states which is a phenomenon
central to ReRAM and other forms of two-terminal resistance
memory. At high frequencies, memristive theory predicts the
pinched hysteresis effect will degenerate, resulting in a straight
line representative of a linear resistor. It has been proven that
some types of non-crossing pinched hysteresis curves (denoted
Type-II) cannot be described by memristors.[51]

Extended memristive
systems[edit]
Some researchers have raised the question of the scientific
legitimacy of HP's memristor models in explaining the behavior
of ReRAM.[38][39] and have suggested extended memristive
models to remedy perceived deficiencies.[25]

One example[52] attempts to extend the memristive systems

framework by including dynamic systems incorporating higher-
order derivatives of the input signal u(t) as a series expansion

where m is a positive integer, u(t) is an input signal, y(t) is

an output signal, the vector x represents a set of n state
variables describing the device, and the
functions g and f are continuous functions. This equation
produces the same zero-crossing hysteresis curves as
memristive systems but with a different frequency
response than that predicted by memristive systems.

Another example suggests including an offset value a to

account for an observed nanobattery effect which
violates the predicted zero-crossing pinched hysteresis
effect.[25]

Implementations[
edit]
Titanium dioxide
memristor[edit]
Interest in the memristor revived when an
experimental solid-state version was reported
by R. Stanley Williams of Hewlett Packard in 2007.
[53][54][55]
 The article was the first to demonstrate that
a solid-state device could have the characteristics
of a memristor based on the behavior
of nanoscale thin films. The device neither uses
magnetic flux as the theoretical memristor
suggested, nor stores charge as a capacitor does,
but instead achieves a resistance dependent on
the history of current.

Although not cited in HP's initial reports on

their TiO2 memristor, the resistance switching
characteristics of titanium dioxide were originally
described in the 1960s.[56]
The HP device is composed of a thin
(50 nm) titanium dioxide film between two 5 nm
thick electrodes, one titanium, the other platinum.
Initially, there are two layers to the titanium dioxide
film, one of which has a slight depletion
of oxygen atoms. The oxygen vacancies act
as charge carriers, meaning that the depleted
layer has a much lower resistance than the non-
depleted layer. When an electric field is applied,
the oxygen vacancies drift (see Fast ion
conductor), changing the boundary between the
high-resistance and low-resistance layers. Thus
the resistance of the film as a whole is dependent
on how much charge has been passed through it
in a particular direction, which is reversible by
changing the direction of current.[16] Since the HP
device displays fast ion conduction at nanoscale, it
is considered a nanoionic device.[57]

Memristance is displayed only when both the

doped layer and depleted layer contribute to
resistance. When enough charge has passed
through the memristor that the ions can no longer
move, the device enters hysteresis. It ceases to
integrate q=∫I dt, but rather keeps q at an upper
bound and M fixed, thus acting as a constant
resistor until current is reversed.

Memory applications of thin-film oxides had been

an area of active investigation for some
time. IBM published an article in 2000 regarding
structures similar to that described by Williams.
[58]
 Samsung has a U.S. patent for oxide-vacancy
based switches similar to that described by
Williams.[59] Williams also has a U.S. patent
application related to the memristor construction.[60]

In April 2010, HP labs announced that they had

practical memristors working at 1 ns (~1 GHz)
switching times and 3 nm by 3 nm sizes,[61] which
bodes well for the future of the technology.[62] At
these densities it could easily rival the current sub-
25 nm flash memory technology.

Polymeric
memristor[edit]
In 2004, Krieger and Spitzer described dynamic
doping of polymer and inorganic dielectric-like
materials that improved the switching
characteristics and retention required to create
functioning nonvolatile memory cells.[63] They used
a passive layer between electrode and active thin
films, which enhanced the extraction of ions from
the electrode. It is possible to use fast ion
conductor as this passive layer, which allows a
significant reduction of the ionic extraction field.

In July 2008, Erokhin and Fontana claimed to have

developed a polymeric memristor before the more
recently announced titanium dioxide memristor.[64]

In 2010, Alibart, Gamrat, Vuillaume et al.

[65]
 introduced a new hybrid organic/nanoparticle
device (the NOMFET : Nanoparticle Organic
Memory Field Effect Transistor), which behaves as
a memristor [66] and which exhibits the main
behavior of a biological spiking synapse.This
device, also called synapstor (synapse transistor),
was used to demonstrate a neuro-inspired circuit
(associative memory showing a pavlovian
learning) [67]

In 2012, Crupi, Pradhan and Tozer described a

proof of concept design to create neural synaptic
memory circuits using organic ion-based
memristors.[68] The synapse circuit
demonstrated long-term potentiation for learning
as well as inactivity based forgetting. Using a grid
of circuits, a pattern of light was stored and later
recalled. This mimics the behavior of the V1
neurons in the primary visual cortex that act as
spatiotemporal filters that process visual signals
such as edges and moving lines.

Layered
memristor[edit]
In 2014, Bessonov et al. reported a flexible
memristive device comprising
a MoOx/MoS2 heterostructure sandwiched between
silver electrodes on a plastic foil.[69] The fabrication
method is entirely based on printing and solution-
processing technologies using two-dimensional
layered transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs).
The memristors are mechanically flexible, optically
transparent and produced at low cost. The
memristive behaviour of switches was found to be
accompanied by a prominent memcapacitive
effect. High switching performance, demonstrated
synaptic plasticity and sustainability to mechanical
deformations promise to emulate the appealing
characteristics of biological neural systems in
novel computing technologies.

Atomristor[edit]
Atomristor is defined as the electrical devices
showing memristive behavior in atomically thin
nanomaterials or atomic sheets. In 2018, Ge and
Wu et al.[70] first reported a universal memristive
effect in single-layer TMD (MX2, M = Mo, W; and X
= S, Se) atomic sheets based on vertical metal-
insulator-metal (MIM) device structure. These
atomristors offer forming-free switching and both
unipolar and bipolar operation. The switching
behavior is found in single-crystalline and poly-
crystalline films, with various metallic electrodes
(gold, silver and graphene). Atomically thin TMD
sheets are prepared via CVD/MOCVD, enabling
low-cost fabrication. Afterwards, taking advantage
of the low "on" resistance and large on/off ratio, a
high-performance zero-power RF switch is proved
based on MoS2 atomristors, indicating a new
application of memristors.[71]

Ferroelectric
memristor[edit]
The ferroelectric memristor[72] is based on a thin
ferroelectric barrier sandwiched between two
metallic electrodes. Switching the polarization of
the ferroelectric material by applying a positive or
negative voltage across the junction can lead to a
two order of magnitude resistance
variation: ROFF ≫ RON (an effect called Tunnel
Electro-Resistance). In general, the polarization
does not switch abruptly. The reversal occurs
gradually through the nucleation and growth of
ferroelectric domains with opposite polarization.
During this process, the resistance is neither
RON or ROFF, but in between. When the voltage is
cycled, the ferroelectric domain configuration
evolves, allowing a fine tuning of the resistance
value. The ferroelectric memristor's main
advantages are that ferroelectric domain dynamics
can be tuned, offering a way to engineer the
memristor response, and that the resistance
variations are due to purely electronic phenomena,
aiding device reliability, as no deep change to the
material structure is involved.

Carbon nanotube
memristor[edit]
In 2013, Ageev, Blinov et al.[73] reported observing
memristor effect in structure based on vertically
aligned carbon nanotubes studying bundles of
CNT by scanning tunneling microscope.

Later it was found[74] that CNT memristive switching

is observed when a nanotube has a non-uniform
elastic strain ΔL0. It was shown that the
memristive switching mechanism of strained СNT
is based on the formation and subsequent
redistribution of non-uniform elastic strain and
piezoelectric field Edef in the nanotube under the
influence of an external electric field E(x,t).

Spin memristive
systems[edit]
Spintronic memristor [edit]
Chen and Wang, researchers at disk-drive
manufacturer Seagate Technology described three
examples of possible magnetic memristors.[75] In
one device resistance occurs when the spin of
electrons in one section of the device points in a
different direction from those in another section,
creating a "domain wall", a boundary between the
two sections. Electrons flowing into the device
have a certain spin, which alters the device's
magnetization state. Changing the magnetization,
in turn, moves the domain wall and changes the
resistance. The work's significance led to an
interview by IEEE Spectrum.[76] A first experimental
proof of the spintronic memristor based on domain
wall motion by spin currents in a magnetic tunnel
junction was given in 2011.[77]

Memristance in a magnetic tunnel

junction [edit]
The magnetic tunnel junction has been proposed
to act as a memristor through several potentially
complementary mechanisms, both extrinsic (redox
reactions, charge trapping/detrapping and
electromigration within the barrier) and intrinsic
(spin-transfer torque).

Extrinsic mechanism [edit]

Based on research performed between 1999 and
2003, Bowen et al. published experiments in 2006
on a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) endowed with
bi-stable spin-dependent states[78](resistive
switching). The MTJ consists in a SrTiO3 (STO)
tunnel barrier that separates half-metallic
oxide LSMO and ferromagnetic metal CoCr
electrodes. The MTJ's usual two device resistance
states, characterized by a parallel or antiparallel
alignment of electrode magnetization, are altered
by applying an electric field. When the electric field
is applied from the CoCr to the LSMO electrode,
the tunnel magnetoresistance (TMR) ratio is
positive. When the direction of electric field is
reversed, the TMR is negative. In both cases,
large amplitudes of TMR on the order of 30% are
found. Since a fully spin-polarized current flows
from the half-metallic LSMO electrode, within
the Julliere model, this sign change suggests a
sign change in the effective spin polarization of the
STO/CoCr interface. The origin to this multistate
effect lies with the observed migration of Cr into
the barrier and its state of oxidation. The sign
change of TMR can originate from modifications to
the STO/CoCr interface density of states, as well
as from changes to the tunneling landscape at the
STO/CoCr interface induced by CrOx redox
reactions.

Reports on MgO-based memristive switching

within MgO-based MTJs appeared starting in
2008[79] and 2009.[80] While the drift of oxygen
vacancies within the insulating MgO layer has
been proposed to describe the observed
memristive effects,[80] another explanation could be
charge trapping/detrapping on the localized states
of oxygen vacancies[81] and its impact[82] on
spintronics. This highlights the importance of
understanding what role oxygen vacancies play in
the memristive operation of devices that deploy
complex oxides with an intrinsic property such as
ferroelectricity[83] or multiferroicity.[84]

Intrinsic mechanism [edit]

The magnetization state of a MTJ can be
controlled by Spin-transfer torque, and can thus,
through this intrinsic physical mechanism, exhibit
memristive behavior. This spin torque is induced
by current flowing through the junction, and leads
to an efficient means of achieving a MRAM.
However, the length of time the current flows
through the junction determines the amount of
current needed, i.e., charge is the key variable. [85]

The combination of intrinsic (spin-transfer torque)

and extrinsic (resistive switching) mechanisms
naturally leads to a second-order memristive
system described by the state vector x = (x1,x2),
where x1 describes the magnetic state of the
electrodes and x2 denotes the resistive state of the
MgO barrier. In this case the change of x1 is
current-controlled (spin torque is due to a high
current density) whereas the change of x2 is
voltage-controlled (the drift of oxygen vacancies is
due to high electric fields). The presence of both
effects in a memristive magnetic tunnel junction
led to the idea of a nanoscopic synapse-neuron
system.[86]

Spin memristive system [edit]

A fundamentally different mechanism for
memristive behavior has been proposed by
Pershin[87] and Di Ventra.[88][89] The authors show
that certain types of semiconductor spintronic
structures belong to a broad class of memristive
systems as defined by Chua and Kang.[2] The
mechanism of memristive behavior in such
structures is based entirely on the electron spin
degree of freedom which allows for a more
convenient control than the ionic transport in
nanostructures. When an external control
parameter (such as voltage) is changed, the
adjustment of electron spin polarization is delayed
because of the diffusion and relaxation processes
causing hysteresis. This result was anticipated in
the study of spin extraction at
semiconductor/ferromagnet interfaces,[90] but was
not described in terms of memristive behavior. On
a short time scale, these structures behave almost
as an ideal memristor.[1] This result broadens the
possible range of applications of semiconductor
spintronics and makes a step forward in future
practical applications.

Self-directed
channel
memristor[edit]
In 2017, Dr Kris Campbell formally introduced the
self-directed channel (SDC) memristor.[91] The SDC
device is the first memristive device available
commercially to researchers, students and
electronics enthusiast worldwide.[92] The SDC
device is operational immediately after fabrication.
In the Ge2Se3 active layer, Ge-Ge homopolar
bonds are found and switching occurs. The three
layers consisting of Ge2Se3/Ag/Ge2Se3, directly
below the top tungsten electrode, mix together
during deposition and jointly form the silver-source
layer. A layer of SnSe is between these two layers
ensuring that the silver-source layer is not in direct
contact with the active layer. Since silver does not
migrate into the active layer at high temperatures,
and the active layer maintains a high glass
transition temperature of about 350 °C (662 °F),
the device has significantly higher processing and
operating temperatures at 250 °C (482 °F) and at
least 150 °C (302 °F), respectively. These
processing and operating temperatures are higher
than most ion-conducting chalcogenide device
types, including the S-based glasses (e.g. GeS)
that need to be photodoped or thermally annealed.
These factors allow the SDC device to operate
over a wide range of temperatures, including long-
term continuous operation at 150 °C (302 °F).

Potential
applications[edit]
Memristors remain a laboratory curiosity, as yet
made in insufficient numbers to gain any
commercial applications. Despite this lack of mass
availability, according to Allied Market Research
the memristor market was worth $3.2 million in
2015 and will be worth $79.0 million by 2022.[93]

A potential application of memristors is in analog

memories for superconducting quantum
computers.[11]

Memristors can potentially be fashioned into non-

volatile solid-state memory, which could allow
greater data density than hard drives with access
times similar to DRAM, replacing both
components.[33] HP prototyped a crossbar latch
memory that can fit 100 gigabits in a square
centimeter,[94] and proposed a scalable 3D design
(consisting of up to 1000 layers or 1 petabit per
cm3).[95] In May 2008 HP reported that its device
reaches currently about one-tenth the speed of
DRAM.[96] The devices' resistance would be read
with alternating current so that the stored value
would not be affected.[97] In May 2012, it was
reported that the access time had been improved
to 90 nanoseconds, which is nearly one hundred
times faster than the contemporaneous Flash
memory. At the same time, the energy
consumption was just one percent of that
consumed by Flash memory.[98]

Memristor patents include applications

in programmable logic,[99] signal processing,
[100]
 physical neural networks,[101] control systems,
[102]
 reconfigurable computing,[103] brain-computer
interfaces,[104] and RFID.[105] Memristive devices are
potentially used for stateful logic implication,
allowing a replacement for CMOS-based logic
computation. Several early works have been
reported in this direction.[106] [107]

In 2009, a simple electronic circuit[108] consisting of

an LC network and a memristor was used to
model experiments on adaptive behavior of
unicellular organisms.[109] It was shown that
subjected to a train of periodic pulses, the circuit
learns and anticipates the next pulse similar to the
behavior of slime molds Physarum
polycephalum where the viscosity of channels in
the cytoplasm responds to periodic environment
changes.[109] Applications of such circuits may
include, e.g., pattern recognition.
The DARPA SyNAPSE project funded HP Labs, in
collaboration with the Boston
University Neuromorphics Lab, has been
developing neuromorphic architectures which may
be based on memristive systems. In
2010, Versace and Chandler described the
MoNETA (Modular Neural Exploring Traveling
Agent) model. [110] MoNETA is the first large-scale
neural network model to implement whole-brain
circuits to power a virtual and robotic agent using
memristive hardware.[111] Application of the
memristor crossbar structure in the construction of
an analog soft computing system was
demonstrated by Merrikh-Bayat and Shouraki.
[112]
 In 2011, they showed[113] how memristor
crossbars can be combined with fuzzy logic to
create an analog memristive neuro-
fuzzy computing system with fuzzy input and
output terminals. Learning is based on the creation
of fuzzy relations inspired from Hebbian learning
rule.

In 2013 Leon Chua published a tutorial underlining

the broad span of complex phenomena and
applications that memristors span and how they
can be used as non-volatile analog memories and
can mimic classic habituation and learning
phenomena.[114]