Researcher profile

M. Di Ventra

M. Di Ventra contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Comment on "$Φ$ memristor: Real memristor found" by F. Z. Wang, L. Li, L. Shi, H. Wu, and L. O. Chua [J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054504 (2019)]

Wang et al. claim [J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054504 (2019)] that a current-carrying wire interacting with a magnetic core represents a memristor. Here, we demonstrate that this claim is false. We first show that such memristor "discovery" is based on incorrect physics, which does not even capture basic properties of magnetic core materials, such as their magnetic hysteresis. Moreover, the predictions of Wang et al.'s model contradict the experimental curves presented in their paper. Additionally, the theoretical pinched hysteresis loops presented by Wang et al. can not be reproduced if their model is used, and there are serious flaws in their "negative memristor" emulator design. Finally, a simple gedanken experiment shows that the proposed $Φ$-memristor would fail the memristor test we recently suggested in J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 52, 01LT01 (2019). The device "discovered" by Wang et al. is just an inductor with memory.

preprint2020arXiv

An experimental proof that resistance-switching memories are not memristors

It has been suggested that all resistive-switching memory cells are memristors. The latter are hypothetical, ideal devices whose resistance, as originally formulated, depends only on the net charge that traverses them. Recently, an unambiguous test has been proposed [J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. {\bf 52}, 01LT01 (2019)] to determine whether a given physical system is indeed a memristor or not. Here, we experimentally apply such a test to both in-house fabricated Cu-SiO2 and commercially available electrochemical metallization cells. Our results unambiguously show that electrochemical metallization memory cells are not memristors. Since the particular resistance-switching memories employed in our study share similar features with many other memory cells, our findings refute the claim that all resistance-switching memories are memristors. They also cast doubts on the existence of ideal memristors as actual physical devices that can be fabricated experimentally. Our results then lead us to formulate two memristor impossibility conjectures regarding the impossibility of building a model of physical resistance-switching memories based on the memristor model.