A Flexible Base Electrode Array for Intraspinal Microstimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we report the development of a flexible base array of penetrating electrodes which can be used to interface with the spinal cord. A customizable and feasible fabrication protocol is described. The flexible base arrays were fabricated and implanted into surrogate cords which were elongated by 12%. The resulting strains were optically measured across the cord and compared to those associated with two types of electrodes arrays (one without a base and one with a rigid base connecting the electrodes). The deformation behavior of cords implanted with the flexible base arrays resembled the behavior of cords implanted with individual microwires that were not connected through a base. The results of the strain test were used to validate a 2-D finite element model. The validated model was used to assess the stresses induced by the electrodes of the three types of arrays on the cord, and to examine how various design parameters (thickness, base modulus, etc.,) impact the mechanical behavior of the electrode array. Rigid base arrays induced higher stresses on the cord than the flexible base arrays which in turn imposed higher stresses than the individual microwire implants. The developed flexible base array showed improvement over the rigid base array; however, its stiffness needs to be further reduced to emulate the mechanical behavior of individual microwire arrays without a base.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".