Impact of program/erase operation on the performances of oxide-based resistive switching memory

Table 1 The distributions of R _on and R _off under different operation modes

Operation	VS_SET and VS_RESET		CS_SET and CS_RESET		VS_SET and CS_RESET		CS_SET and VS_RESET		SP_P and SP_E		AP_P and AP_E
Parameters	R _on	R _off	R _on	R _off	R _on	R _off	R _on	R _off	R _on	R _off	R _on	R _off
σ (kΩ)	0.716	3.7178	1.006	8.930	3.933	4.368	0.157	3.549	0.181	4.376	0.117	1.552
μ (kΩ)	1.218	25.338	1.927	29.154	3.513	24.494	0.673	32.051	0.575	10.708	0.453	12.687
σ/μ	0.588	0.147	0.522	0.306	1.119	0.178	0.234	0.111	0.315	0.409	0.268	0.122
β	5	9	3	3.4	2.1	6.7	6.5	10.5	3.5	5	5	10
R _63%(kΩ)	1.274	26.425	1.945	32.233	2.582	26.049	0.700	33.010	0.637	10.427	0.491	13.976

The comparison of four DC operation methods and two pulse operation methods on their controllability to the variation in Ti/HfO₂/Pt RRAM device are listed in the above.
σ is the standard deviation, μ is the mean value, σ/μ is the coefficient of variation, and β and R _63% are the shape factor (or Weibull slop) and scale factor of the Weibull distributions of resistances, respectively.