ChatNeuroSim: An LLM Agent Framework for Automated Compute-in-Memory Accelerator Deployment and Optimization
Organizations: Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Abstract
Compute-in-Memory (CIM) architectures have been widely studied for deep neural network (DNN) acceleration by reducing data transfer overhead between the memory and computing units. In conventional CIM design flows, system-level CIM simulators (such as NeuroSim) are leveraged for design space exploration (DSE) across different hardware configurations and DNN workloads. However, CIM designers need to invest substantial effort in interpreting simulator manuals and understanding complex parameter dependencies. Moreover, extensive design-simulation iterations are often required to identify optimal CIM configurations under hardware constraints. These challenges severely prolong the DSE cycle and hinder rapid CIM deployment. To address these challenges, this work proposes ChatNeuroSim, a large language model (LLM)-based agent framework for automated CIM accelerator deployment and optimization. ChatNeuroSim automates the entire CIM workflow, including task scheduling, request parsing and adjustment, parameter dependency checking, script generation, and simulation execution. It also integrates the proposed CIM optimizer using design space pruning, enabling rapid identification of optimal configurations for different DNN workloads. ChatNeuroSim is evaluated on extensive request-level testbenches and demonstrates correct simulation and optimization behavior, validating its effectiveness in automatic request parsing and task execution. Furthermore, the proposed design space pruning technique accelerates CIM optimization process compared to no-pruning baseline. In the case study optimizing Swin Transformer Tiny under 22 nm technology, the proposed CIM optimizer achieves a 0.42-0.79 average runtime reduction compared to the same optimization algorithm without design space pruning.
Figures & tables
| Query Category | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Single Call | Single testbench and one simulation with one fixed set of parameters. | I want to simulate VGG8 on CIFAR-10 on CIM architecture using 8b quantization for both input and weight. I only want to get the PPA estimation. The memory device is 22nm RRAM with 1bit cell precision. The state conductances are 25uS and 167uS with no variations. The subarray size is 128x128 and ADC precision 7bit. |
| Multiple Call | Multiple testbenches and simulations with different user’s specified parameter values. | I want to simulate VGG8 on CIFAR-10 on CIM architecture using 8b quantization for both input and weight. I only want to get the PPA estimation under 22nm, 14nm, and 7nm tech node. The memory device is SRAM. The subarray size is 128x128 and ADC precision 7bit. |
| Testbench Auto-design | Multiple testbenches and simulations with user’s specified parameter names but without specified parameter values. | Check the accuracy drop of ResNet-18 on CIFAR-100 of different input and weight quantization precisions. Only simulate the accuracy without the PPA. Run 5 batches with the batch size 100. Use 1b cell with a subarray of 128x128 and 7b ADC. |
| PPA Optimization | PPA optimization request to find the best CIM configuration under constraints. | I’d like to design an CIM chip within 3600mm 2 based on 22nm tech node running ResNet-50 on ImageNet with the minimum power consumption. Use simulate annealing to find out the optimal parameter combination of device type, ADC type, ADC precision, subarray size, subarray mux with 20 episodes. |
| Parameters | Range / Values |
|---|---|
| Model | ResNet-50, Swin-T, ViT-B |
| Dataset | ImageNet |
| Input / Weight precision | 8b / 8b |
| Technology node | 22nm |
| Device | SRAM, RRAM, FeFET |
| ACIM subarray column / row a | 32, 64, 128, 256, 512 |
| Batch Size | GA (Samples) | SA (Samples) | TPE (Samples) | Average Batch Runtime (min)* | Average Total Runtime (min)** |
| 16 | 1277 | 719 | 1862 | 5.9 | 472 |
| 32 | 1048 | 622 | 1660 | 7.2 | 250 |
| 48 | 1459 | 598 | 1831 | 9.9 | 266 |
| LLM / Accuracy (%) | Single Call | Multiple Call | Testbench Auto-design | PPA Optimization | Total Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.1 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| GPT-5 mini | 100 | 90 | 80 | 90 | 90 |
| DeepSeekV3.2-Reasoner | 90 | 100 | 100 | 90 | 95 |
| DeepSeekV3.2-Chat | 80 | 90 | 60 | 80 | 77.5 |
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Compute-in-Memory
Compute-in-memory (CIM) performs computation within or beside memory arrays to reduce data movement and accelerate AI workloads.
See all 56 papers