EVIDENCE-LED RESEARCH ATLAS · 2026

From material to decision. From evidence to claim.

An integrated, critical synthesis of IGZO resistive devices, analogue arrays, peripheral circuits, edge workloads, fabrication choices and system-level validation.

This is a research roadmap, not an announcement of a completed IGZO product or measured end-to-end advantage.

Explore the programme ↗
Conceptual IGZO device and computing-array illustration

01 / CRITICAL FINDINGS

What the evidence actually says

Device ≠ circuit

The up-to-82% SET and 54% READ energy figures reported by Das et al. concern a HfO₂/CMOS 3T1R synapse circuit. They are not measured IGZO platform savings. Source ↗

Simulation ≠ system

Naqi et al. fabricated a 10×10 IGZO array. Their CNN/SNN recognition rates are tied to electrical and network simulation; the same article reports approximately 500 cycles and >10⁴ s retention. Source ↗

Target ≠ result

The supplied project drafts include <1 ms, <1 W, 300× and 10⁶ cycles without project-specific raw system measurements. We retain them only as hypotheses or test targets.

02 / SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE

Six coupled layers

Conceptual synaptic device

Material & device

Film composition, electrode interface, conductance states, switching distributions, retention, endurance and read disturb.

Conceptual crossbar array

Crossbar & 1T1R

Vector–matrix multiplication, sneak paths, line resistance, selectors and array yield.

Conceptual peripheral circuit chain

Drivers & readout

Programming pulses, current compliance, sensing, ADC/DAC, reference cells and peripheral energy.

Conceptual model programming and inference

Hardware-aware algorithm

Measured-device-aware training, weight encoding, programming verification and recalibration.

Conceptual sensor-to-decision system

Sensor-to-edge decision

Sensor, preprocessing, DAC/array/ADC, local inference, decision and actuation measured on a matched workload.

Conceptual authorized update and safety boundary

Secure operation & evidence

Across all layers: authorized updates, audit trails, fail-safe behavior, batch variation, uncertainty and independent replication.

Array potential becomes a system benefit only when accuracy, peripheral energy and a matched workload are measured together. Device, simulation and end-to-end results remain distinct. Jiang et al. ↗

03 / FABRICATION & ACCEPTANCE

Three routes, one acceptance standard

A · Sourced devices

Procure IGZO devices, apply incoming QC, then integrate and calibrate. The draft planning range is 18–30 months.

B1 · In-house fabrication

Record films, electrodes, lithography, annealing and batch-level metrology with traceable process revisions. Draft range: 24–36 months.

B2 · Outsourced fabrication

Control specification and provenance while retaining independent incoming QC and system integration. Draft range: 24–36 months.

All routes require prespecified pass criteria, raw traces, rejected samples, batch variation and read-disturb measurements before progressing to 32×32. Moving to 64×64 is conditional. Decision gates ↗

04 / EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION

Measure the complete path

Conceptual memristive core

Device and array bench

Test state separation, write/read energy, retention, endurance, cell and batch variability, yield, MVM error and calibration cost. Compare passive crossbar with 1T1R under matched accuracy targets.

Conceptual feedback loop

Sensor-to-decision demonstrator

Measure p50/p95/p99 latency and energy per valid inference including sensor, preprocessing, converters, array, controller and actuator. Keep a task-matched digital baseline.

E_write = ∫ V(t)I(t)dt   ·   E_infer = E_total / N_valid

Lock data splits, sample and batch counts, instrument bandwidth, uncertainty method, environmental conditions and failure rules before measuring.

05 / MULTIDISCIPLINARY SYNTHESIS

Six disciplines, one evidence chain

Materials science

Stoichiometry, oxygen chemistry, interfaces, process control and physical characterisation.

Electrical engineering

Line losses, selection, ADC/DAC, noise, power accounting and array scaling.

Machine learning

Hardware-aware training, quantisation, calibration, dataset leakage and matched accuracy.

Metrology

Instrument traceability, nested batch sampling, uncertainty intervals and failure reporting.

Security & safety

Authorised updates, fault injection, safe states and documented AI risk management.

Energy & economics

Energy per valid inference, idle power, process yield, maintenance and total cost boundaries.

06 / CLAIM CLASSIFICATION

Do not merge evidence levels

Measured in literature

Specific IGZO device and array results with stated structure, sample size and conditions. They are not results of the proposed platform.

Modelled

Circuit or neural-network simulation, even when parameterised with measured device data. It does not establish complete hardware performance.

Proposed

Latency, power, scaling and security goals that need preregistered tests and independent replication.

Read the full claim audit ↗

07 / INTERACTIVE FORMULATIONS

From equations to testable assumptions

Ideal crossbar

Iⱼ = Σᵢ VᵢGᵢⱼ

Ignores line resistance and device variation until these are added from measurement.

System energy

Eₜ = Eₛ + E_DAC + E_array + E_ADC + E_ctrl

Shows why an array-only value cannot support an end-to-end claim.

Simple array yield

P(all pass) = pᴺ

Illustrative independence assumption only; manufacturing defects can be correlated.

Normalised array error

NRMSE = √[Σ(I_meas−I_ref)² / ΣI_ref²]

Show raw and post-calibration outputs separately.

Energy per valid inference

Eᵢ = ∫P_system(t)dt / N_valid

Declare the measurement interval and validity rule in advance.

Tail latency

L₉₅ = Q₀.₉₅(t_decision−t_sensor)

A median alone hides slow decisions.

Open the interactive lab ↗

08 / TECHNICAL LIBRARY

Download the technical reports

Evidence and materials

Device physics, metrology, fabrication gates and claim corrections, with linked primary sources.

Download report ↓

Systems and benchmarking

Crossbar error budgets, end-to-end energy, fair baselines, application safety and reproducibility.

Download report ↓

The complete research programme is also available as a printable page.

09 / VISUAL ATLAS

19 conceptual illustrations

These images communicate research concepts. They are not device photographs, measured plots or validated prototype results.

PORTFOLIOS 1–2 / ADDITIONAL AUDIT

What the embedded documents add

Both PDF portfolios contain 13 embedded files. Compiled volumes repeat some of the individual documents; repetition is not independent evidence. Commercial pitches, drafts, patent compilations and peer-reviewed experiments are classified separately.

Datacentres and cooling

Claims of 300× processor efficiency, 90% less cooling and PUE≈1.0 are project assertions. Chip, server and facility boundaries must be measured separately. The IEA estimates 415 TWh of global datacentre electricity in 2024 and a cooling share ranging from about 7% to over 30% by facility type.

IEA evidence ↗

Telemetry and cognitive interfaces

Motorsport, driver-state and brain–machine interface narratives are candidate research uses. The portfolios do not provide independent end-to-end validation of 1 ms, 1 W, 99% accuracy or deployment for this IGZO platform.

Test first on recorded data with participant/session separation and shadow-mode evaluation.

Device-specific IGZO evidence

Wang et al. (2026) report a 1-kb Pt/IGZO/SiNₓ/Ta array with endurance above 10⁶ cycles and retention above 10⁶ s. That result belongs to a different device stack and does not establish the portfolio platform's performance.

Nature Communications ↗

The portfolio's F1–F6 facets denote physics, computation, life/cognition, infrastructure, economy and governance; they are a conceptual lens rather than six validated hardware stages. The patent compilation documents claims and scope, not readiness or measured system performance. Private counterparties and contract terms remain outside this public atlas.

10 / REFERENCES

Selected primary sources and official guidance