Comparative Electrochemical Investigation of Pt, Au and Ti Electrodes on Liquid Crystal Polymer for the Application of Neuromuscular Prostheses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the electrochemical impedance of Platinum (Pt), Gold (Au), and Titanium (Ti) deposited on liquid crystal polymer (LCP) to understand charge transfer mechanism of implantable electrodes for neuromuscular electrical stimulation. Electrodes are fabricated through e-beam evaporation and characterized using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) measurements. A theoretical model is proposed to explain physical functionalities. The results demonstrate as the size of electrodes increases, higher conductivity and double layer capacitance are obtained. In neuromuscular stimulation frequencies, Pt electrodes offer the best conductivity followed by Ti and Au respectively. This material dependence of impedance magnitude is related to the surface morphology of the electrodes and is assessed by AFM. Deposition pressure dependence of Ti electrodes on the impedance is observed due to change of surface roughness and double layer capacitor. This study addresses the interface impedance of implanted electrodes and permits further development of neuromuscular prostheses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".