MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052065637 · doi:10.1109/tbcas.2013.2255595

Wireless Recording Systems: From Noninvasive EEG-NIRS to Invasive EEG Devices

2013· article· en· W2052065637 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamad Sawan, Muhammad Tariqus Salam, Junjie Lan, Alain Kassab, Sebastien Gelinas, Phetsamone Vannasing, Frédéric Lesage, Maryse Lassonde, Dang Khoa Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Notre-DameCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBluetoothComputer scienceWirelessPreamplifierComputer hardwareTransceiverBrain–computer interfaceChannel (broadcasting)ElectroencephalographyBandwidth (computing)TelecommunicationsAmplifier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present the design and implementation of a wireless wearable electronic system dedicated to remote data recording for brain monitoring. The reported wireless recording system is used for a) simultaneous near-infrared spectrometry (NIRS) and scalp electro-encephalography (EEG) for noninvasive monitoring and b) intracerebral EEG (icEEG) for invasive monitoring. Bluetooth and dual radio links were introduced for these recordings. The Bluetooth-based device was embedded in a noninvasive multichannel EEG-NIRS system for easy portability and long-term monitoring. On the other hand, the 32-channel implantable recording device offers 24-bit resolution, tunable features, and a sampling frequency up to 2 kHz per channel. The analog front-end preamplifier presents low input-referred noise of 5 μ VRMS and a signal-to-noise ratio of 112 dB. The communication link is implemented using a dual-band radio frequency transceiver offering a half-duplex 800 kb/s data rate, 16.5 mW power consumption and less than 10(-10) post-correction Bit-Error Rate (BER). The designed system can be accessed and controlled by a computer with a user-friendly graphical interface. The proposed wireless implantable recording device was tested in vitro using real icEEG signals from two patients with refractory epilepsy. The wirelessly recorded signals were compared to the original signals recorded using wired-connection, and measured normalized root-mean square deviation was under 2%.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations76
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Circuits and SystemsSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207