Analysis of the Selective Nature of Sensory Nerve Stimulation Using Different Sinusoidal Frequencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the ability to selectively activate different nerve fibers in a finger by using different sinusoidal stimulation frequencies. Specifically, the stimulation of A-beta, A-delta, and C-fibers is looked into, and responses from each of three different stimuli (5 Hz, 250 Hz, and 2000 Hz) are compared. Action potential (AP) responses from the different nerve fibers are simulated. Activation thresholds are determined for each fiber type. The resulting firing frequencies are compared with thresholds found in the literature to determine the stimulating signal amplitude at which sensations begin to be perceived for each stimulation frequency. Results indicate that while selective stimulation of C-fibers and A-beta fibers appears to be possible with 5 Hz and 2000 Hz, respectively, selective stimulation of A-delta fibers may not be possible due to them requiring a higher stimulating signal amplitude to cause the nerve to reach the physiological threshold than A-beta fibers for 250 Hz. Thus, selective stimulation of the three types of nerve fibers may not be possible for all three examined frequencies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".