MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140593697 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2004.834293

Evaluation of Interactions of Electric Fields Due to Electrostatic Discharge With Human Tissue

2004· article· en· W2140593697 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor W. Dawson, M.A. Stuchly, Robert Kavet

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Inactivation Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrostatic dischargeElectric fieldMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringVoltagePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrostatic discharges (ESDs) produce in the human tissue very strong electric fields of short duration. Possible biophysical interactions are evaluated by comparing the fields in subcutaneous fat/skin to the thresholds for peripheral nerve stimulation, and by computations of membrane potential and electric fields in cytoplasm of a typical cell in bone marrow. It is found that a 4-A peak ESD event is capable of stimulation of nerves located in subcutaneous fat of the lower arm of the hand eliciting a spark, with tens of kV/m and pulse duration of approximately 80 ns. For the same ESD event, the transmembrane potential (TMP) reaches 32 mV with a pulse duration of approximately 200 ns (half-width duration). The electric field in the cytoplasm of a bone marrow cell changes from about 8.8 kV/m to--2 kV/m in about 200 ns.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicMicrobial Inactivation MethodsFrench-language works237,207