mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SpikeSim: An end-to-end Compute-in-Memory Hardware Evaluation Tool for Benchmarking Spiking Neural Networks

arXiv 2210.12899 ↗First posted 24 Oct 2022cs.NE cs.CVcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

SNNs are an active research domain towards energy efficient machine intelligence. Compared to conventional ANNs, SNNs use temporal spike data and bio-plausible neuronal activation functions such as Leaky-Integrate Fire/Integrate Fire (LIF/IF) for data processing. However, SNNs incur significant dot-product operations causing high memory and computation overhead in standard von-Neumann computing platforms. Today, In-Memory Computing (IMC) architectures have been proposed to alleviate the "memory-wall bottleneck" prevalent in von-Neumann architectures. Although recent works have proposed IMC-based SNN hardware accelerators, the following have been overlooked- 1) the adverse effects of crossbar non-ideality on SNN performance due to repeated analog dot-product operations over multiple time-steps, 2) hardware overheads of essential SNN-specific components such as the LIF/IF and data communication modules. To this end, we propose SpikeSim, a tool that can perform realistic performance, energy, latency and area evaluation of IMC-mapped SNNs. SpikeSim consists of a practical monolithic IMC architecture called SpikeFlow for mapping SNNs. Additionally, the non-ideality computation engine (NICE) and energy-latency-area (ELA) engine performs hardware-realistic evaluation of SpikeFlow-mapped SNNs. Based on 65nm CMOS implementation and experiments on CIFAR10, CIFAR100 and TinyImagenet datasets, we find that the LIF/IF neuronal module has significant area contribution (>11% of the total hardware area). We propose SNN topological modifications leading to 1.24x and 10x reduction in the neuronal module's area and the overall energy-delay-product value, respectively. Furthermore, in this work, we perform a holistic comparison between IMC implemented ANN and SNNs and conclude that lower number of time-steps are the key to achieve higher throughput and energy-efficiency for SNNs compared to 4-bit ANNs.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Oct 2022.

Builds on

13 of 49 references.

References · 13

  1. 2017Spatio-Temporal Backpropagation for Training High-performance Spiking Neural Networkscited by 399
  2. 2018Going Deeper in Spiking Neural Networks: VGG and Residual Architecturescited by 236
  3. 2021A Free Lunch From ANN: Towards Efficient, Accurate Spiking Neural Networks Calibrationcited by 111
  4. 2020Revisiting Batch Normalization for Training Low-latency Deep Spiking Neural Networks from Scratchcited by 76
  5. 2019PUMA: A Programmable Ultra-efficient Memristor-based Accelerator for Machine Learning Inferencecited by 57
  6. 2022Rate Coding or Direct Coding: Which One is Better for Accurate, Robust, and Energy-efficient Spiking Neural Networks?cited by 24
  7. 2022SATA: Sparsity-Aware Training Accelerator for Spiking Neural Networkscited by 18
  8. 2018RxNN: A Framework for Evaluating Deep Neural Networks on Resistive Crossbarscited by 17
  9. 2022Examining the Robustness of Spiking Neural Networks on Non-ideal Memristive Crossbarscited by 9
  10. 2017RESPARC: A Reconfigurable and Energy-Efficient Architecture with Memristive Crossbars for Deep Spiking Neural Networkscited by 8
  11. 2021H2Learn: High-Efficiency Learning Accelerator for High-Accuracy Spiking Neural Networkscited by 7
  12. 2021SIAM: Chiplet-based Scalable In-Memory Acceleration with Mesh for Deep Neural Networkscited by 6
1 more
  1. 2021Efficiency-driven Hardware Optimization for Adversarially Robust Neural Networkscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 5; 2025: 1.

8 papers.