Evaluation of high-density, multi-contact nerve cuffs for activation of grasp muscles in monkeys
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
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work was to evaluate whether nerve cuffs can selectively activate hand muscles for functional electrical stimulation (FES). FES typically involves identifying and implanting electrodes in many individual muscles, but nerve cuffs only require implantation at a single site around the nerve. This method is surgically more attractive. Nerve cuffs may also more effectively stimulate intrinsic hand muscles, which are difficult to implant and stimulate without spillover to adjacent muscles. APPROACH: To evaluate its ability to selectively activate muscles, we implanted and tested the flat interface nerve electrode (FINE), which is designed to selectively stimulate peripheral nerves that innervate multiple muscles (Tyler and Durand 2002 IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 10 294-303). We implanted FINEs on the nerves and bipolar intramuscular wires for recording compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) from up to 20 muscles in each arm of six monkeys. We then collected recruitment curves while the animals were anesthetized. MAIN RESULT: A single FINE implanted on an upper extremity nerve in the monkey can selectively activate muscles or small groups of muscles to produce multiple, independent hand functions. SIGNIFICANCE: FINE cuffs can serve as a viable supplement to intramuscular electrodes in FES systems, where they can better activate intrinsic and extrinsic muscles with lower currents and less extensive surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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