MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2182072240 · doi:10.1109/biocas.2015.7348360

A lightweight discrete biphasic current stimulator for rodent deep brain stimulation

2015· article· en· W2182072240 on OpenAlexafffund
Adan I. Acosta, M. Sohail Noor, Zelma H. T. Kiss, Kartikeya Murari

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsBattery (electricity)VoltageElectrical engineeringPower (physics)CapacitorElectrodeCurrent sourcePulsed powerMaterials scienceAnodePulse (music)Pulse generatorCurrent (fluid)Computer sciencePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a miniaturized discrete system for long-term biphasic deep brain stimulation (DBS) with independently programmable anodic and cathodic currents and pulse widths, frequency, pulse order and interpulse interval. It features a single current source and an H-bridge for setting current direction. The single source allows good charge balance, limiting DC current to under 50 nA which is further reduced to below 1 nA by electrode shorting. Voltage compliance is limited to 12 V. The device along with battery power supply weighs 2.3 g. The system is highly customizable, permitting tradeoff between voltage compliance and the range, resolution and accuracy of currents and between power consumption and temporal resolution with minimal hardware modification. Based on average current consumption and nominal battery capacity, the stimulator can provide 300 μA, 130 Hz, 100 μs symmetric biphasic stimulation with an 11.5 V compliance for 14 days. Design details, characterization measurements and experimental data comparing the stimulator to a benchtop device in an anesthetized rat are presented.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeurological disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→