MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093548887 · doi:10.1109/memea.2014.6860108

Transparent conductive glass for biopotential recordings

2014· article· en· W2093548887 on OpenAlexaff
Jikku T. Abraham, Adrian D. C. Chan, Philip Tworzydlo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrodeMaterials scienceElectrical conductorOptoelectronicsElectrical impedanceBiomedical engineeringElectrical engineeringComposite materialChemistryMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transparent conductive oxides are investigated for use as noninvasive, surface biopotential electrode. Performance of the ITO electrode is compared against conventional Ag/AgCl electrodes. Results show that the ITO electrodes have an electrode-skin impedance that is approximately an order of magnitude higher than Ag/AgCl electrodes. The electrocardiogram is similar in the time and frequency domain. Results suggest that the ITO electrodes do not perform as well as Ag/AgCl electrodes but could be comparable to other dry electrodes (e.g., stainless steel). While ITO electrodes are probably not suited for clinical diagnostic ECG applications, their transparent feature could be useful in other applications, such as medical biometrics.

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)0.000
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207