Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 50 references

Signal amplification in simple metal-insulator transition devices

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A simple voltage divider made of one linear resistor and one metal-insulator device amplifies small AC signals by up to ~11.5x when the device is biased into its negative differential resistance regime.

desk verdict A clean, useful demonstration of NDR-based voltage gain in a two-terminal LSMO device, with a model that is more a rearrangement of the measured I-V than a true prediction, and a need for error bars and a frequency check before trusting the 11.5x. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.16566 v1 pith:LFLBKQSO submitted 2026-07-18 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.str-el

Victor Palin , Nareg Ghazikhanian , Matthew Frame , Yayoi Takamura , Ivan K. Schuller , Pavel Salev This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.str-el
keywords metal-insulatortransitionnegativedifferentialresistancesignalamplificationaxonemulationneuromorphiccomputingvolatileresistiveswitchingLSMOvoltagedivider
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that a two-terminal device made of a metal-insulator transition material, when biased at the verge of its phase transition, acts as a high-gain amplifier of small AC signals, achieving up to ~11.5x amplification. The mechanism is that the device's negative differential resistance reverses the sign of the current response, so the AC voltage across the device grows rather than shrinks when the input rises. The paper derives a simple predictive rule: the AC gain equals one minus the series resistance times the differential conductance of the device, meaning anything with a steep negative dI/dV can amplify. It demonstrates amplification of realistic neuron-like spikes from a VO2 oscillator, pointing to compact axon-like amplifiers for neuromorphic circuits. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers a scalable alternative to CMOS amplifiers for large neural networks.

What carries the argument

The central object is the negative differential resistance (NDR) region of the metal-insulator transition device's I-V characteristic, accessed by DC-biasing at the onset of MIT switching. NDR is the regime where current decreases as voltage increases (dI/dV < 0). The load-bearing identity is AC gain = 1 - Rs·(dI/dV): because dI/dV is negative in the NDR region, the subtracted term flips sign, so an increase in AC voltage reduces the current, lowering the voltage drop across the series resistor and increasing the voltage across the device itself, which is the output. The quasi-static differential conductance dI/dV, measured from a slow voltage ramp, serves as the input to the model.

What would settle it

Measure the AC gain at several frequencies (e.g., 100 Hz to 1 MHz) under the same DC bias and series resistance, and compare with Eq. (3) computed from the quasi-static I-V curve; if the gain changes substantially with frequency or the device cannot repeatedly return to the same NDR branch each cycle, the quasi-static model is invalid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Biasing an LSMO device into the negative differential resistance (NDR) region of its I-V curve yields AC gain up to ~11.5x in a voltage-divider circuit, and the gain is quantitatively captured by AC gain = 1 - Rs·(dI/dV), where dI/dV is taken from the quasi-static I-V characteristic. The gain is largest when the I-V curve shows abrupt switching with minimal hysteresis, and it can be controlled by DC bias, AC amplitude, series resistance, and temperature. The device also amplifies spiking sequences from a real VO2 neuristor with a factor of ~5x while preserving spike shape, demonstrating practical axon-like functionality.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes the device's small-signal response at the operating frequency is fully described by the quasi-static I-V slope dI/dV; if phase-transition kinetics, thermal time constants, or capacitive effects alter the dynamic conductance, the predicted gain and the proposed amplification mechanism will not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same amplifier principle should apply to any material with a steep, dynamically accessible NDR; N-type NDR materials can be used directly, while S-type NDR materials like VO2, NbO2, and SmNiO3 could work if the circuit is modified for current-controlled conditions.
  • Varying the DC bias switches the circuit between attenuation (PDR) and amplification (NDR), enabling a single device to act as both an axon-like amplifier and a tunable gain/synaptic-weight element.
  • Amplifying spikes from a VO2-based neuristor shows that MIT-based neurons and axon-like amplifiers can be integrated directly in the same materials platform.
  • Nonvolatile memristors with NDR are unsuitable because their NDR is not dynamically accessible to small AC signals; volatile switching is essential for the amplification mechanism.
  • Optimizing gain requires maximizing the NDR while minimizing I-V hysteresis, giving a concrete materials-selection rule for future axon-like amplifiers.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the quasi-static dI/dV model holds, the gain should be approximately frequency-independent up to the speed of the phase transition; a testable prediction is that gain will roll off when the AC period approaches the switching time constant.
  • Because larger AC excitations reduce gain, the circuit has an inherent nonlinear compression or limiting behavior that could be exploited for signal normalization in spiking networks.
  • The principle may extend to other first-order phase-transition or volatile resistive switching systems beyond LSMO, provided the switching is repeatable and the NDR branch can be held stably for long times.
  • The DC-bias-controlled attenuation/amplification transition could be used as an analog gain clamp or automatic gain control element in neuromorphic or conventional analog circuits, going beyond axon emulation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports AC signal amplification in a two-terminal La0.7Sr0.3MnO3 (LSMO) metal-insulator-transition (MIT) device connected in a voltage-divider circuit with a series resistor. When the device is DC-biased into the negative differential resistance (NDR) regime near the MIT switching threshold, a small 1-kHz AC excitation is amplified by up to about 11.5×. The authors show that the gain can be tuned by DC bias, AC amplitude, series resistance, and temperature, and they demonstrate amplification of a recorded VO2-neuristor spiking sequence. They propose a design rule, Eq. (3): AC gain = 1 - Rs·ΔI/ΔV, in which the gain is determined from the measured I-V characteristic, and they argue that NDR is the enabling mechanism. The paper claims this establishes a general framework for axon-like amplification in nonlinear electronic materials.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a useful conceptual and practical result: it shows that a simple, compact two-terminal device based on a MIT material can provide local signal amplification in a neuromorphic circuit, without a conventional CMOS amplifier, and it identifies an easily measurable criterion (negative ΔI/ΔV) for above-unity gain. The demonstration of spike amplification using a real VO2 neuristor is a concrete step toward integrated artificial neurons and axons. The paper is clearly written, the circuit derivation in Supplementary A is elementary and correct, and the parameter sweeps in Fig. 2 give a useful map of the operating window. However, the quantitative claims are weakened by the absence of error bars or repeated measurements, by the ambiguous definition of gain for the strongly distorted output waveforms, and by the lack of any frequency-dependent check of the quasi-static I-V slope used in the model. These are load-bearing issues for the paper's central 'model predicts gain' claim and for the reproducibility of the ~11.5× figure.

major comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 3a-b and Supplementary A] Eq. (3) is derived as an algebraic identity from Kirchhoff's voltage law: gain = 1 - Rs·(ΔI_AC/ΔV_AC,in). As such, it is exact by construction for any circuit obeying that relation. The only predictive content comes from replacing ΔI_AC/ΔV_AC,in with the quasi-static ΔI/ΔV obtained from the I-V ramp in Fig. 3a. The manuscript provides no evidence that the dynamic small-signal conductance at 1 kHz equals the quasi-static slope. Phase-transition kinetics, Joule-heating thermal time constants, or capacitive/RC effects could make the dynamic differential conductance smaller, phase-shifted, or hysteretic, particularly when the 40-mV AC swing approaches the abrupt switching threshold. The paper should either (a) measure the gain at several frequencies (e.g., 100 Hz to 100 kHz) and show that the prediction holds, or (b) measure the small-signal dynamic impedance at the operating point. As writt
  2. [Eq. (2) and Fig. 1d] The AC gain is defined as V_AC,out/V_AC,in, but the output waveform in the high-gain regime is visibly distorted, with abrupt jumps at the MIT switching threshold. No information is given about how the AC amplitude was extracted: peak-to-peak, RMS, fundamental Fourier component, or some other convention. For a strongly nonlinear waveform, these definitions give very different numbers, and the reported 11.5× may be dominated by harmonic content rather than by linear small-signal amplification. The authors should state the amplitude extraction method, report total harmonic distortion (THD) or the amplitude of the fundamental, and ideally separate 'small-signal gain at 1 kHz' from 'peak-to-peak amplification of a distorted waveform'. This is essential for evaluating the quantitative claim and for comparing with future work.
  3. [Figs. 2 and 4] All quantitative claims (gain values, tuning curves, temperature map, spike amplification factor of ~5×) are presented without error bars, without the number of repeated measurements, and without specifying how many nominally identical devices were tested. The abstract calls the amplification 'robust,' but there is no statistical evidence. At minimum, the authors should show representative repeated traces or include error bars/standard deviations in Figs. 2b-d, and state the number of devices and measurement cycles. This is needed to assess device-to-device and cycle-to-cycle variability, especially because the MIT switching is stochastic and hysteretic.
  4. [Supplementary A, Eq. (3)] The derivation in Supplementary A is correct but is a rearrangement of the definitions, not a physical model. The paper should explicitly state that Eq. (3) is an exact circuit relation and that the model's usefulness depends entirely on the quasi-static/dynamic equivalence described in the first major comment. This is not an error, but framing it as 'we propose a model that predicts the gain' is misleading unless the dynamic equivalence is tested. Please adjust the wording and add the missing validation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (1)] Equation (1) is confusing as written: V_in = V_FG + (50 Ω)·I. The text says the FG has a built-in 50-Ω series resistor, so the effective series resistance is Rs + 50 Ω. Please clarify the sign convention, the physical meaning of V_in, and why V_in differs from V_FG. As written, a reader cannot reproduce the calculation of the 'effective series resistance' or the gain without guessing.
  2. [Fig. 3a] The caption says 'I-V characteristic of an LSMO device in series with a 400 Ω resistor,' but the main text says 'of an LSMO device in series with a 400 Ω resistor.' Please clarify whether the voltage axis is the total applied voltage (across device plus series resistor) or the voltage across the LSMO device alone. This is important because Eq. (3) uses ΔI/ΔV, and the derivative should be taken with respect to the input voltage, not the device voltage.
  3. [Fig. 3d] The caption mentions 'peak differential conductance (orange)' but the axes and units are not visible. Please label the y-axis clearly (e.g., ΔI/ΔV in S or mS) and specify how the 'peak' was extracted from the noisy derivative.
  4. [Discussion, last paragraph before Summary] There is a typo: 'NRD regime' should be 'NDR regime.'
  5. [Fig. 4b] The inset claims the spike shape is 'well-preserved,' but the output shows visible differences in amplitude and shape. Please quantify the preservation (e.g., normalized cross-correlation, spike-width error) or soften the wording.
  6. [General] The paper does not state the measurement bandwidth, the oscilloscope input impedance, or whether parasitic capacitances were considered. Given the 1-kHz operating frequency, these are probably minor, but a brief note would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the gain is directly measured and Eq. (3) is a circuit-law derivation; self-citations are background only.

full rationale

The central claim—AC gain up to ~11.5x in an LSMO/Rs voltage divider biased into the NDR/MIT regime—is established by direct oscilloscope measurements (Fig. 1d, Figs. 2 and 4) and does not depend on the model. Eq. (3) is derived in Suppl. A from Kirchhoff's voltage law under a small-signal assumption; it is a transparent circuit-law result, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The input dI/dV is measured independently from the quasi-static I-V (Fig. 3a), so the model is not circular: it would fail if the 1-kHz dynamic differential conductance differed from the quasi-static slope. That frequency assumption is a correctness risk, not a circularity. Self-citations (Refs. 39-41, 50) provide background on LSMO switching/NDR and on ion-beam techniques; they are not load-bearing for the amplification observation. Accordingly, the paper is self-contained and shows no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; the model uses the measured I-V directly and all control parameters (R_s, V_DC, V_AC, T) are experimental inputs. The load-bearing assumptions are circuit linearity/frequency-independence, stability of the NDR branch, and the prior MIT-barrier mechanism. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Kirchhoff's voltage law for the series circuit: dV_in = dI*Rs + dV_LSMO
    Used in Supplementary A to derive Eq. (3); assumes a lumped circuit with no stray reactance.
  • domain assumption The LSMO device can be modeled as a voltage-controlled nonlinear resistor whose AC differential conductance equals the quasi-static slope dI/dV at 1 kHz
    Required for Eq. (3) to predict the measured gain from the I-V curve (Fig. 3a,b); no frequency-dependent impedance or phase-transition kinetics are included.
  • domain assumption The NDR branch is stable and repeatedly accessible under small AC excitation without irreversible switching or oscillation
    Stated implicitly in Results (Figs. 2-4): amplification requires repeatedly driving the device across the MIT switching region; stability is ensured by the series resistor, but no stability criterion is analyzed.
  • domain assumption Electrical triggering of the MIT in LSMO produces a volatile insulating-phase barrier, as established in prior work
    The mechanism is borrowed from cited literature (Refs. 40, 41) and is not independently proved in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Signal amplification in simple metal-insulator transition devices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LFLBKQSO

@misc{pith2026260716566,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Signal amplification in simple metal-insulator transition devices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LFLBKQSO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.16566}
}
read the original abstract

Signal dissipation in large-scale neural networks can lead to information loss and ultimately to computational failures, necessitating local signal amplification at neuron - synapse connections. In biological nervous systems, axons are responsible for local signal amplification. Translating axon functionality into hardware, i.e., the ability to amplify and transmit signals without loss, is non-trivial because emulating the human brain implies building networks composed of ~10 billion interconnected neurons, each requiring a dedicated compact and scalable amplifier. Here, we demonstrate signal amplification in simple two-terminal devices made of a metal-insulator transition material. By operating the devices on the verge of the phase transition and taking advantage of negative differential resistance, we achieve robust signal amplification up to a factor of ~11.5. We also demonstrate the amplification of spiking sequences generated by a real neuristor, opening new exciting opportunities for the direct integration of artificial neurons and axons. The amplification can be controlled by easily adjustable experimental parameters, including DC bias, AC excitation, series resistance, and temperature. We further propose a model that predicts the gain using readily observable transport characteristics. Our results establish a framework for developing and optimizing axon-like amplification functionalities in nonlinear electronic materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16566 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. a. I-V characteristics recorded using several series resistors, Rs. All curves display a characteristic NDR and a rapid MIT switching, which can be tuned by varying Rs. The inset shows an SEM image of a 2×1 µm² LSMO device. b. Electrical circuit used for the amplification measurements. A function generator supplies a superimposed small AC excitation + DC bias signal. Two oscilloscope channels, VFG and Vout, are used… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. a. Schematic of the experiment in which a neuron￾like spiking sequence obtained using a VO2 oscillator is fed into the LSMO amplifier. In this experiment, the LSMO device is DC-biased in the NDR region, and the experimental spiking sequence is superimposed on the DC bias. b. Time traces of the AC input (blue) and output (orange) signals, demonstrating the amplification of neuron-like spikes by the MIT axon. c. The t… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Wang, S. et al. Technology Roadmap of Bioinspired Computing Hardware. ACS Nano 20, 8102–8163 (2026)

    2026

  2. [2]

    Information processing in the axon

    Debanne, D. Information processing in the axon. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 5, 304–316 (2004)

    2004

  3. [3]

    & Debanne, D

    Rama, S., Zbili, M. & Debanne, D. Signal propagation along the axon. Curr . Opin. Neurobiol. 51, 37–44 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Hoffmann, A. et al. Quantum materials for energy-efficient neuromorphic computing: Opportunities and challenges. APL Mater . 10, 070904 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Azevedo, F. A. C. et al. Equal numbers of neuronal and nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled‐up primate brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 513, 532–541 (2009)

    2009

  6. [6]

    R., Koester, J

    Kandel, E. R., Koester, J. D., Mack, S. H. & Siegelbaum, S. A. Principles of Neural Science. (McGraw-Hill Education, New York, NY , USA, 2013)

    2013

  7. [7]

    & Lecar, H

    Ehrenstein, G. & Lecar, H. The Mechanism of Signal Transmission in Nerve Axons. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 1, 347–366 (1972)

    1972

  8. [8]

    G., Rozenberg, M

    del Valle, J., Ramírez, J. G., Rozenberg, M. J. & Schuller, I. K. Challenges in materials and devices for resistive- switching-based neuromorphic computing. J. Appl. Phys. 124, (2018). 9

    2018

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Park, T. J. et al. Complex Oxides for Brain-Inspired Computing: A Review. Adv. Mater. 35, 2203352 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    & Paturi, P

    Schulman, A., Huhtinen, H. & Paturi, P. Manganite memristive devices: recent progress and emerging opportunities. J. Phys. Appl. Phys. 57, 422001 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    M., Caffrey, N

    Rondinelli, J. M., Caffrey, N. M., Sanvito, S. & Spaldin, N. A. Electronic properties of bulk and thin film SrRuO3: Search for the metal-insulator transition. Phys. Rev. B 78, 155107 (2008)

    2008

  4. [12]

    Georgescu, A. B. & Millis, A. J. Quantifying the role of the lattice in metal–insulator phase transitions. Commun. Phys. 5, 135 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    & Indiveri, G

    Chicca, E., Stefanini, F., Bartolozzi, C. & Indiveri, G. Neuromorphic Electronic Circuits for Building Autonomous Cognitive Systems. Proc. IEEE 102, 1367–1388 (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    & Datta, S

    Salahuddin, S., Ni, K. & Datta, S. The era of hyper-scaling in electronics. Nat. Electron. 1, 442–450 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    & Kenyon, A

    Mehonic, A. & Kenyon, A. J. Brain-inspired computing needs a master plan. Nature 604, 255–260 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Torres, F., Basaran, A. C. & Schuller, I. K. Thermal Management in Neuromorphic Materials, Devices, and Networks. Adv. Mater. 35, 1–23 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Christensen, D. V . et al. 2022 roadmap on neuromorphic computing and engineering. Neuromorphic Comput. Eng. 2, 022501 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Schuman, C. D. et al. Opportunities for neuromorphic computing algorithms and applications. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 10–19 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    & Liu, S.-C

    Indiveri, G. & Liu, S.-C. Memory and Information Processing in Neuromorphic Systems. Proc. IEEE 103, 1379– 1397 (2015)

    2015

  12. [20]

    Eshraghian, J. K. et al. Training Spiking Neural Networks Using Lessons From Deep Learning. Proc. IEEE 111, 1016–1054 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    D., Medeiros-Ribeiro, G

    Pickett, M. D., Medeiros-Ribeiro, G. & Williams, R. S. A scalable neuristor built with Mott memristors. Nat. Mater. 12, 114–117 (2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Yi, W. et al. Biological plausibility and stochasticity in scalable VO2 active memristor neurons. Nat. Commun. 9, 4661 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    & Schuller, I

    del Valle, J., Salev, P., Kalcheim, Y . & Schuller, I. K. A caloritronics-based Mott neuristor. Sci. Rep. 10, 4292 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Moon, T. et al. Leveraging volatile memristors in neuromorphic computing: from materials to system implementation. Mater. Horiz. 11, 4840–4866 (2024). 10

    2024

  17. [25]

    Torrejon, J. et al. Neuromorphic computing with nanoscale spintronic oscillators. Nature 547, 428–431 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    Grollier, J. et al. Neuromorphic spintronics. Nat. Electron. 3, 360–370 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    Wang, Z. et al. Resistive switching materials for information processing. Nat. Rev. Mater . 5, 173–195 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Jo, S. H. et al. Nanoscale Memristor Device as Synapse in Neuromorphic Systems. Nano Lett. 10, 1297–1301 (2010)

    2010

  21. [29]

    & Alibart, F

    La Barbera, S., Vuillaume, D. & Alibart, F. Filamentary Switching: Synaptic Plasticity through Device V olatility. ACS Nano 9, 941–949 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    & Bibes, M

    Garcia, V . & Bibes, M. Ferroelectric tunnel junctions for information storage and processing. Nat. Commun. 5, 4289 (2014)

    2014

  23. [31]

    Lee, S. et al. Variance-aware weight quantization of multi-level resistive switching devices based on Pt/LaAlO3/SrTiO3 heterostructures. Sci. Rep. 12, 9068 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Technology and metrology of new electronic materials and devices

    V ogel, E. Technology and metrology of new electronic materials and devices. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2, 25–32 (2007)

    2007

  25. [33]

    Brown, T. D. et al. Axon-like active signal transmission. Nature 633, 804–810 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    D., Kumar, S

    Brown, T. D., Kumar, S. & Williams, R. S. Physics-based compact modeling of electro-thermal memristors: Negative differential resistance, local activity, and non-local dynamical bifurcations. Appl. Phys. Rev. 9, 011308 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Gao, L., Chen, P.-Y . & Yu, S. NbOx based oscillation neuron for neuromorphic computing. Appl. Phys. Lett. 111, 103503 (2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    Hennen, T. et al. Switching Speed Analysis and Controlled Oscillatory Behavior of a Cr-Doped V2O3 Threshold Switching Device for Memory Selector and Neuromorphic Computing Application. in 2019 IEEE 11th International Memory Workshop (IMW) 1–4 (IEEE, Monterey, CA, USA, 2019). d...

    2019

  29. [37]

    Liu, H. et al. A Tantalum Disulfide Charge-Density-Wave Stochastic Artificial Neuron for Emulating Neural Statistical Properties. Nano Lett. 21, 3465–3472 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Adda, C. et al. Direct Observation of the Electrically Triggered Insulator-Metal Transition in V3O5 Far below the Transition Temperature. Phys. Rev. X 12, (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Palin, V . et al. Inhibitory neuristor based on metal-to-insulator transition. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.19951 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    Salev, P. et al. Transverse barrier formation by electrical triggering of a metal-to-insulator transition. Nat. Commun. 11 12, (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    Salev, P. et al. V oltage-controlled magnetic anisotropy enabled by resistive switching. Phys. Rev. B 107, 054415 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Bohaichuk, S. M. et al. Fast Spiking of a Mott VO2 –Carbon Nanotube Composite Device. Nano Lett. 19, 6751– 6755 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Das, S. K. et al. Physical Origin of Negative Differential Resistance in V3O5 and Its Application as a Solid-State Oscillator. Adv. Mater. 35, (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Kumar, S., Strachan, J. P. & Williams, R. S. Chaotic dynamics in nanoscale NbO2 Mott memristors for analogue computing. Nature 548, 318–321 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    Luibrand, T. et al. Characteristic length scales of the electrically induced insulator-to-metal transition. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, (2023)

    2023

  38. [46]

    Du, Y . et al. Symmetrical Negative Differential Resistance Behavior of a Resistive Switching Device. ACS Nano 6, 2517–2523 (2012)

    2012

  39. [47]

    Feng, Y . et al. Negative Differential Resistance Effect in Ru-Based RRAM Device Fabricated by Atomic Layer Deposition. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 14, 86 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Crunteanu, A. et al. V oltage- and current-activated metal–insulator transition in VO2 -based electrical switches: a lifetime operation analysis. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 11, 065002 (2010)

    2010

  41. [49]

    & Shvets, I

    Murtagh, O., Walls, B. & Shvets, I. V . Controlling the resistive switching hysteresis in VO2 thin films via application of pulsed voltage. Appl. Phys. Lett. 117, 063501 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Ghazikhanian, N. et al. Resistive switching localization by selective focused ion beam irradiation. Appl. Phys. Lett. 123, (2023). 12 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Signal amplification in simple metal-insulator transition devices Victor Palin1, Nareg Ghazikhanian1, Matthew Frame2,...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.