MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080593927 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6091150

A framework for the discrimination of neural pathways using multi-contact nerve cuff electrodes

2011· article· en· W2080593927 on OpenAlexaff
José Zariffa, Mary K. Nagai, Martin Schüettler, Thomas Stieglitz, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Miloš R. Popović

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoInternational Collaboration On Repair Discoveries
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCuffNeurophysiologyTask (project management)Sciatic nerveBiomedical engineeringPeripheral nerveNeuroscienceEngineeringMedicineAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring the activity of specific neural pathways in a peripheral nerve is a task with numerous applications in implanted neuroprosthetic systems. Achieving selective recording using multi-contact nerve cuff electrodes is appealing because these devices are well suited for chronic use, but no viable general solution to the task of discriminating combinations of active pathways from extra-neural recordings has yet been proposed. Bioelectric source localization approaches have been suggested, but their effectiveness is limited by the accuracy of the nerve model used to solve the forward problem. We propose a model-free alternative to the pathway discrimination task, in which experimental data is used to estimate a solution to the forward problem. The method was evaluated using a 56-channel cuff placed on the rat sciatic nerve. 3 pathways were discriminated with a 94.2% success rate when individually active, whereas further improvements are needed in order to recover combinations of simultaneously active pathways.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.230
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.095 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207