MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modular transcutaneous functional electrical stimulation system

2004· article· en· W2102735839 on OpenAlexafffund
Miloš R. Popović, Thierry Keller

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersToronto Rehabilitation Institute
KeywordsFunctional electrical stimulationModular designNeuroprostheticsRehabilitation engineeringComputer scienceMotion (physics)Functional movementStimulationFlexibility (engineering)Muscle fatigueBiomedical engineeringEngineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationNeuroscienceMedicineElectromyographyArtificial intelligencePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new multipurpose programmable transcutaneous electric stimulator, Compex Motion, was developed to allow users to design various custom-made neuroprostheses, neurological assessment devices, muscle exercise systems, and experimental setups for physiological studies. Compex Motion can generate any arbitrary stimulation sequence, which can be controlled or regulated in real-time using any external sensor or laboratory equipment. Compex Motion originated from the existing Compex 2 electric stimulator, manufactured by a Swiss based company, Compex SA. The Compex Motion stimulator represents a further evolution and expansion of the ETHZ-ParaCare functional electrical stimulation system. This stimulator provides all the advanced functional electrical stimulation (FES) application and control features and can be easily incorporated into any standard rehabilitation program. Compex Motion has successfully been applied as a neuroprosthesis for walking, reaching and grasping in more than 100 stroke and spinal cord injured patients. This system has also been used to strengthen muscles and to investigate muscle properties in able-bodied subjects. Compex Motion is a multipurpose FES system specially designed to promote sharing and exchanging of stimulation protocols, sensors, and user interfaces. To the best of our knowledge an FES system that has similar capabilities does not exist yet.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations103
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207