MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187767169 · doi:10.15406/aovs.2015.02.00044

Bionic Eye: A Glance at the Argus II retinal prosthesis

2015· article· en· W2187767169 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Ophthalmology & Visual System · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgusRetinal ProsthesisMedicineOphthalmologyOptometryRetinalVisual prosthesisRetinal implantComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Argus II retinal prosthesis is a promising new artificial vision restoration technology that, after years of extensive research, is now being implemented on a commercial basis. It is currently the only retinal implant to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Health Canada, and the Conformite Europeenne. As of now, it is strictly indicated for patients with retinitis pigmentosa and a history of prior useful vision that has worsened to the point of bare light perception or no light perception vision in both eyes. It utilizes an electrode array to stimulate residual retinal ganglion cells, which relay through the visual processing system to the visual cortex and allow the patient to perceive spatial and temporal patterns of lights. The largest prospective multi-center clinical study involving the Argus II implant found that patients demonstrated significant visual improvement as measured by performance on square localization, grating visual acuity, and direction of motion tasks. Recipients also exhibited functional visual improvements as assessed by a door task, line task, and the Functional Low Vision Observer Rated Assessment (FLORA). This was noted for up to three years following implantation of the device. Both in the research and commercial setting, the Argus II technology has proven to be incredibly promising. Ongoing research is directed at improving the existing Argus II technology, developing next-generation devices, and expanding indications of vision restoration to those who do not currently meet Argus II indications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Ophthalmology & Visual SystemSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207