MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High-Density Implantable Microelectrode Arrays for Brain-Machine Interface Applications

2014· article· en· W2054608762 on OpenAlexafffund
Bahareh Ghane-Motlagh, Mohamad Sawan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in science and technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsPolytechnique MontréalCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicroelectrodeElectrodeMasking (illustration)OptoelectronicsBiomedical engineeringElectrical impedanceCoatingSiliconMultielectrode arrayNeural ProsthesisNanotechnologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microelectrode arrays (MEAs) act as an interface between electronic circuits and neural tissues of implantable devices. Biological response to chronic implantation of MEAs is an essential factor in determining a successful electrode design. Finding appropriate coating materials which are biocompatible and improve electrical properties of MEAs are among the main challenges. In this paper, we propose a novel, three-dimensional (3D), high-density, silicon-based MEAs for both neural recording and stimulation. Electrodes were fabricated using micromachining techniques. Geometrical features of these electrodes not only cause less tissue damage during insertion but also provide more contacts between the electrodes and targeted neural tissues. In order to achieve the proposed geometry, we introduce a novel masking method to coat variable-height electrodes with uniform and small tip-exposure. More importantly, compared to conventional techniques, the new masking method significantly improves process time and costs. This technique needs only one step masking and reduces the conventional masking steps from ten to three. In the next step, the active sites of the electrodes were coated with thin-films of molybdenum (Mo) and platinum (Pt) due to their ability to transfer between ionic and electronic current and to resist corrosion. Electrodes were characterized by scanning electron microscopy and impedance measurements. The average impedance of Mo and Pt electrodes at 1 kHz was 350 ± 50 kΩ and 150 ± 10 kΩ, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in science and technologySame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207