MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2337562652 · doi:10.1109/lascas.2016.7451013

Wireless monitoring of collagen progression around implantable prostheses

2016· article· en· W2337562652 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmad Hassan, Aref Trigui, Mohamad Sawan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanada Research ChairsCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMaterials scienceCapacitanceElectrical impedanceNetwork analyzer (electrical)Biomedical engineeringCoupling (piping)Resonance (particle physics)Equivalent circuitWirelessOptoelectronicsElectronic engineeringAcousticsComposite materialElectrical engineeringComputer scienceChemistryEngineeringVoltageElectrodePhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bıocompatıbılıty remains a critical issue due to the foreign body response following device implantation. “Collagen” is the main bio-material composed around the implanted devices. This paper reports the possibility to measure the thickness of the “Collagen layers” using impedance measurement. An implanted passive circuit sensitive to the collagen thickness is wirelessly connected to the external reading circuit through inductive coupling. The resonance frequency of the system is directly proportional to the Collagen layer thickness variation. A modeling and simulation study of the Collagen material is presented by “COMSOL” to verify the functionality and obtain the optimal design parameters. Reported results demonstrate the increment of collagen capacitance from 30fF to 120fF when the collagen thickness rises from 1mm to 6mm. The experimental validation is reported using Impedance Analyzer. The measured resonance frequency drops from 55.78MHz to 54.98MHz when the collagen thickness increases from 0 to 10mm.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→