Bioelectronic Imaging Array Based on Bacteriorhodopsin Film
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A photoreceptor array that exploits the light sensitive bacteriorhodopsin (bR) films has been manufactured on a flexible indium-tin-oxide (ITO) coated plastic film using electrophoretic sedimentation technique (EPS). The effective sensing area of each photoreceptor is 2 x 2 mm (2), separated by 1 mm and arranged in a 4 x 4 array. A switched integrator with gain on the order of 10(10) is used to amplify the signal to a suitable level. When exposed to light, the differential response characteristic is attributed to charge displacement and recombination within bR molecules, as well as loading effects of the attached amplifier. The peak spectral response occurs at 568 nm and is linear over the tested light power range of 200 mu W to 12 mW. The response remains linear at other tested wavelengths, but with reduced amplitude. Initial tests have indicated that responsivity among all photoreceptors is greater than 71% of the average value, 465.25 mV/mW. The differential nature of the signal generated by bR makes it a suitable sensing material for vision applications such as motion detection. The prototype array demonstrates this property by employing Reichardt's delay-and-correlate algorithm. Furthermore, fabricating sensor arrays on flexible substrates introduces a new design approach that enables non-planar imaging surfaces.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it