Advertisement

Journal of Electronic Testing

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 587–599 | Cite as

Current-Based Testing, Modeling and Monitoring for Operational Deterioration of a Memristor-Based LUT

  • T. Nandha Kumar
  • Haider A. F. Almurib
  • Fabrizio Lombardi
Article
  • 163 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents a method for operational testing of a memristor-based look-up table (LUT) memory block. In the proposed method the deterioration of the memristors (as storage elements of a LUT), is modeled based on the reduction of the resistance range, a phenomenon well known as reported in the technical literature. A quiescent current technique is used to diagnose the memristors when deterioration results in a change of state, thus leading to a fault. In addition to testing, the proposed method can be utilized also for continuous monitoring of the memristor deterioration in the LUT. The deterioration of the memristors is modeled using a simple yet accurate equivalent circuit. The proposed method is simulated using LTSPICE and extensive simulation results are presented for operational deterioration with respect to different features such as LUT dimension, range of memristance and MOSFET feature size. These results show that the proposed test method is highly efficient for testing and monitoring a LUT in the presence of deteriorating multiple memristors.

Keywords

Memristor Testing Deterioration Current based test Monitoring 

References

  1. 1.
    “Xilinx SpartanTM-3AN FPGAs.” http://www.xilinx.com
  2. 2.
    “Xilinx Spartan Data sheet”, http://www.xilinx.com
  3. 3.
    Almurib HAF, Kumar TN, Lombardi F (2014) A memristor-based LUT for FPGAs. In Proc. of 9th IEEE International Conference on Nano/Micro Engineered and Molecular System IEEE-NEMS, pp 448–453Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Almurib HAF, Kumar TN, Lombardi F (2014) Scalable application-dependent diagnosis of interconnects of SRAM-based FPGAs. IEEE Trans Comput 63(6):1540–1550MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biolek Z, Biolek D, Biolova V (2009) SPICE model of memristor with nonlinear Dopant drift. Radioengineering 18(2):210–214Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chua LO (1971) Memristor - the missing circuit element. IEEE Trans Circuit Theory ct-18(5):507–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feng W, Lombardi F, Almurib HAF, Kumar TN (2013) Testing a nano crossbar for multiple fault detection. IEEE Trans Nanotechnol 12(4):477–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haron NZ, Hamdioui S (2011) On defect oriented testing for hybrid CMOS/memristor memory. In the Proc. of ATS, pp 353–358Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kumar TN, Almurib HAF, Lombardi F (2014) A novel design of a memristor-based Look-Up Table (LUT) for FPGA. IEEE Asia Pacific Conference on Circuits & SystemsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumar TN, Almurib HAF, Lombardi F (2015) Operational fault detection and monitoring of a memristor-based LUT. Proc. Design Automation and Test in Europe (DATE), Grenoble, March, pp. 429–434Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nickel J (2011) Memristor materials engineering: from flash replacement towards a universal memory. Proceedings of the IEEE IEDM Advanced Memory Technology Workshop, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Predictive Technology Model (PTM) website, http://ptm.asu.edu/
  13. 13.
    Sun F, Zhang T (2007) Defect and transient fault-tolerant system design for hybrid CMOS/Nanodevice digital memories. IEEE Trans Nanotechnol 6(3)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tang X, Pun KP (2009) High-performance CMOS current comparator. Electron Lett 45(20):1007–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu C, Dong X, Jouppi NP, Xie Y (2011) “Design implications of memristor-based RRAM cross-point structures” in the Proc of Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang JJ, Pickett MD, Li X, Ohlberg DAA, Stewart DR, Williams RS (2008) Memristive switching mechanism for metal/oxide/metal nanodevices. Nat Nanotechnol 3:429–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang JJ, Zhang M-X, Strachan JP, Miao F, Pickett MD et al (2010) High switching endurance in TaOx memristive devices. Appl Phys Lett 97Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhao L, Walker DMH, Lombardi F (1998) Iddq testing of bridging faults in reconfigurable FPGAs. IEEE Trans Comput C47(10):1136–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Nandha Kumar
    • 1
  • Haider A. F. Almurib
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Lombardi
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of EngineeringThe University of Nottingham, MalaysiaSemenyihMalaysia
  2. 2.Department of ECENortheastern UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations