MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150166359 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.4022

AN IMPLANT FOR A VISUAL CORTICAL STIMULATOR

2011· article· en· W2150166359 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Jonathan Coulombe, Yamu Hu, J.-F. Gervais, Mohammad Sawan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCMC Microsystems
KeywordsTroubleshootingComputer scienceWirelessFlexibility (engineering)Telecommunications linkVoltageComputer hardwareEmbedded systemElectrical engineeringEngineeringComputer networkTelecommunicationsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the design of an implantable micro-stimulator intended for a cortical visual prosthesis. The device is composed of several integrated modules to be assembled on a thin and flexible substrate providing placement flexibility on the cortex. The stimulator provides the user with significant usage flexibility, supplying biphasic current pulses using either monopolar or bipolar configurations, with single or distributed return electrode, and having a fixed or dynamic reference voltage. Monitoring of electrode-tissue interface condition is possible by measuring both simulation currents and voltages at any electrode for enhanced safety, and for enabling troubleshooting after implantation. In order to avoid erroneous stimulation to be executed, potentially caused by the implant's wireless transcutaneous power transfer, constant parameters stored in volatile memory are constantly monitored, and in case of data corruption, stimulation is automatically disabled. A power efficient recovery and regulation circuit is proposed for providing dual supply voltages. Also, a bidirectional wireless link with data rates up to 1.5 Mbps and 500 kbps, downlink and uplink respectively, has been designed for use with a 13.56 MHz carrier. Performances attained with a prototype, combined with the stimulator module's configurable communication protocol, are suitable for a cortical implant having more than 1000 stimulation sites, which is expected to be sufficient for providing blind subjects with a useful vision.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207