MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018000085 · doi:10.1109/biocas.2011.6107715

Low-power energy-based CMOS digital detector for neural recording arrays

2011· article· en· W2018000085 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Drolet, Hicham Semmaoui, Mohamad Sawan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchCMC MicrosystemsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsThresholdingComputer scienceDetectorCMOSBandwidth (computing)Channel (broadcasting)Artificial neural networkEnergy consumptionEnergy (signal processing)Electronic engineeringComputer hardwareArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research works in wireless neural recording systems by microelectrode arrays favor spikes extraction to limit the required bandwidth. While simple thresholding locates spikes, using an adequate pre-processor before thresholding can improve the performances of detection. We present in this paper low-power implementations of three interesting energy-based preprocessors (Abs, TEO, and Smoothed-TEO). The proposed novel spike detection module allows a trade-off between silicon area and power consumption of the system. Performances have been evaluated with recorded neural signals from monkeys to determine the optimal trade-off. The post-routed power estimation showed that the implementation of the optimal detection pre-processor tested in this work, the Smoothed-TEO, achieves 961 nW per channel and occupies a silicon area of 0.008 mm2per channel.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207