Advancements in Artificial Intelligence Circuits and Systems (AICAS)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper attempts an interesting review in a field that seems to rise as an emerging hardware oriented activity around AI, addressing gaps created within the overall software-driven trends. Being still in some aspects an "uncharted territory" the authors have to tackle challenges in terms of review scope and definitions which right constitute major shortcomings in the article.

IMO the content of the article should be focused on implementation of AI inside electronics. The authors should devote less elaboration on historical background, milestones, architectures, applications etc of topics that easily can be claimed that belong to electronics or AI in a more general sense (and not specifically in the topic of AI implementation inside electronic circuits).  There is over-generalization with issues under the general AI field while topics like TPUs, NPUs, Memristors, Finfets etc are covered in a very small part of the article - these are the topics which I recommend to be more elaborated and provided in the paper in more detail.

Moreover the use of AICAS as an acronym and field is still not well established within the global community and introduced by IEEE in 2019 and in the context of AICAS conference. Better defining the term and mapping the area would be beneficiary.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your insightful feedback on our paper. We appreciate your perspective on the emerging field of AI implementation within electronic circuits and recognize the importance of focusing more on the specifics of this area.

In response to your suggestions, we have revised the paper to emphasize the implementation of AI in electronics, particularly in the context of TPUs, NPUs, and GPUs. We have expanded these sections to provide a more detailed and focused analysis, ensuring that they are at the forefront of our discussion.

Regarding the use of the acronym AICAS, we understand your concerns about its relative novelty and lack of widespread recognition. We have taken steps to better define this term and clarify its role and significance in the context of our paper. This includes a more thorough mapping of the area to ensure clarity and relevance to our readers and the global community.

We are grateful for your recommendations, which have significantly contributed to the enhancement of our paper. Your expertise and guidance have been invaluable in helping us refine our focus and improve the overall quality of our work.

Sincerely,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper offers a thorough analysis of AICAS developments, following its evolution from conception to current implementations. It start with the fundamental ideas that form the basis of AICAS and then explore the cutting-edge architectures and design paradigms that are advancing the discipline. The many uses of AICAS are also highlighted by this review, ranging from enhancing the energy efficiency of electronics to enabling the development of cognitive computing systems in the future. 

Important issues like robustness and scalability are covered in detail, along with possible fixes and new developments that could influence AICAS in the future.

Researchers, engineers, and business executives wishing to leverage AI in electronics may find this paper to be a useful resource as it provides a thorough overview of the present situation and future direction of AICAS.

The paper is very clear and well written (in some parts english is so good that it seems written by an AI).

The review provides a lot of useful references and a comprehensive discussion offering also the interesting viewpoint of the authors.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for such a warm reception of our work.
I hasten to explain the language. The language correction was made by our colleague - Captain M.Eng. Irmina Durlin, who has been working for many years using only English. Additionally, our translation has been checked by a sworn translator.
Thank you very much for this linguistic assessment.

Kind regards

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article presents a comprehensive overview of the current status and potential trajectory of AICAS. I believe the authors have addressed the issue well and the article does not need any special revision. The work for me can be published after these minor revisions have been made:

- check the formatting of the bibliography according to the journal's guidelines because all years should be in bold and instead are not;

- Table #4 should be expanded. Are there other institutions that have contributed even if more superficially in the world apart from the US, China, Singapore, UK and Switzerland?

- A figure showing the structural difference between the different proposed technologies should be included because it is not clear to those unfamiliar with the topic the difference between all the technologies presented.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your positive evaluation of our article on AICAS and for highlighting areas that require minor revisions. We are pleased to hear that our work aligns well with the subject matter and appreciate your constructive feedback for its finalization. Below are the steps we have taken to address your suggestions:

1. Formatting of the Bibliography: We have carefully reviewed the formatting of our bibliography and have now adjusted it to comply with the journal's guidelines. All years in the citations are now presented in bold, ensuring consistency and adherence to the required format.

2. Expansion of Table #4: In response to your suggestion, we have expanded Table #4 to include additional global contributions to the field of AICAS. We recognize the importance of a diverse perspective and have therefore included institutions from other countries such as Japan, Germany, South Korea, and India. This expansion provides a more comprehensive view of the global efforts and contributions in AICAS, reflecting a wider range of research and development activities beyond the initially mentioned countries.

3. Inclusion of a Comparative Figure: To address the need for clarity on the structural differences between various technologies discussed in our article, we have included a new figure. This figure visually represents and compares the structural aspects of different technologies.

We believe these revisions enhance the clarity, accuracy, and comprehensiveness of our article, making it more accessible and informative for our readers. We are grateful for your guidance in this process and are confident that these changes align with the high standards of your esteemed journal.

Sincerely,

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The provided article is comprehensive and well-organized. The prepared article will be interesting and beneficial to a specific circle of researchers. The article provides relevant information. It includes a substantial list of scientific literature sources.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your time and kind words. We have tried to collect and present the current knowledge to interest the reader in further reflections.

Warm greetings

Tymoteusz Miller

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your kind reply, considerations and addressing my comments. The paper is significantly enhanced in the areas concerning my review.

My only follow-up comment on a minor issue: in lines 51-56 you refer to the process of the review and how you addressed the AICAS term comment which IMO should not be included. Readers won't be interested in the review process and improvements made from previous versions and this should be reserved for replies towards reviewers & editors. If you decide to keep the part referring to IEEE I recommend including a reference.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your invaluable feedback. In light of your suggestions, we have removed the section previously found in lines 51-58. Your thorough review and insightful comments are greatly appreciated. Thank you once again for your dedicated efforts throughout the review process.

 

Best Regards