MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116266833 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2007.48

Body-Motion Driven MEMS Generator for Implantable Biomedical Devices

2007· article· en· W2116266833 on OpenAlexaff
Jose Martinez-Quijada, Sazzadur Chowdhury

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Power Transfer Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical engineeringElectromagnetic coilCapacitorVoltagePlanarGenerator (circuit theory)Microelectromechanical systemsFootprintPower (physics)Computer scienceMagnetic fluxTopology (electrical circuits)PhysicsNuclear magnetic resonanceOptoelectronicsEngineeringMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A MEMS-based axial flux power generator has been developed for use in implantable biomedical devices, such as cardiac pacemakers, hearing aid instruments, etc. The microgenerator can provide a greater energy supply per unit volume at a much smaller size and weight compared to conventional batteries. The device operates on the principle of electromagnetic induction of a voltage across a microfabricated planar copper coil exposed to a changing magnetic flux due to a bio-mechanically driven microfabricated magnetic (NdFeB) planar semi-circular pendulum. A thin air gap separates the magnetic pendulum from the underlying planar coil. The generated voltage peaks can be rectified, filtered, stepped up, and stored in super capacitors to provide a stable voltage supply. With a footprint area of 1.0 mm2and thickness of 500 mum, the device can generate 390 muWRMSpower at an open-circuit voltage of 1.1 VRMS. A number of microgenerators could be stacked or a scaled up version can be used if greater amount of power is necessary.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Power Transfer SystemsFrench-language works237,207