MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118447745 · doi:10.1088/1741-2560/10/1/016007

Dense arrays of micro-needles for recording and electrical stimulation of neural activity in acute brain slices

2012· article· en· W2118447745 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Deborah E. Gunning, John M. Beggs, W. Dąbrowski, Paweł Hottowy, C. Kenney, Alexander Sher, A. M. Litke, Keith Mathieson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neural Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilResearch Councils UKQueen's UniversityMcKnight FoundationUniversity of GlasgowNational Science Foundation
KeywordsElectrophysiologyElectrodeMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringMicrofabricationStimulationSIGNAL (programming language)Electrode arrayMultielectrode arrayMicroelectrodePlanarNeuroscienceComputer scienceChemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the design, microfabrication, electrical characterization and biological evaluation of a high-density micro-needle array. The array records from and electrically stimulates individual neurons simultaneously in acute slices of brain tissue. APPROACH: Acute slices, arguably the closest in-vitro model of the brain, have a damaged surface layer. Since electrophysiological recording methods rely heavily on electrode-cell proximity, this layer significantly attenuates the signal amplitude making the use of traditional planar electrodes unsuitable. To penetrate into the tissue, bypassing the tissue surface, and to record and stimulate neural activity in the healthy interior volume of the slice, an array of 61 micro-needles was fabricated. MAIN RESULTS: This device is shown to record extracellular action potentials from individual neurons in acute cortical slices with a signal to noise ratio of up to ∼15:1. Electrical stimulation of individual neurons is achieved with stimulation thresholds of 1.1-2.9 µA. SIGNIFICANCE: The novelty of this system is the combination of close needle spacing (60 µm), needle heights of up to 250 µm and small (5-10 µm diameter) electrodes allowing the recording of single unit activity. The array is coupled to a custom-designed readout system forming a powerful electrophysiological tool that permits two-way electrode-cell communication with populations of neurons in acute brain slices.

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 score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neural EngineeringSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207