Analytical modeling of a conducting polymer‐driven catheter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A time‐dependent electrochemical and mechanical model of the bending of a conducting polymer actuator‐driven structure is presented, and the predicted response is compared with experimental results. The model uses time constants obtained from a transmission line model to describe the electronic and ionic charge transport into the polymer actuator. It then relates the charge transport to the mechanical deflection of the actuator structure. The model is used to predict the time‐dependent bending of an active catheter, which is ultimately intended for use in intravascular imaging. A commercial catheter is coated with polypyrrole and laser micromachined into electrodes, which are electrochemically activated, leading to bending of the catheter. The time‐dependent bending is compared with the dynamic beam bending model, with measured physical properties including elastic moduli, strain to charge ratio, electronic conductivity, ionic conductivity and capacitance used in the model to successfully describe the dynamics. The results of this comparison are used to determine the primary factors limiting catheter bending speed, and to suggest an optimal polypyrrole geometry and electrochemical parameters in order to achieve faster response. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".