MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754275505 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2017.2754220

Effects of Flexible Dry Electrode Design on Electrodermal Activity Stimulus Response Detection

2017· article· en· W2754275505 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A. Haddad, Amir Servati, S. Soltanian, Frank Ko, Peyman Servati

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)ElectrodeSkin conductanceBiomedical engineeringEngineeringPsychologyChemistryCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The focus of this research is to evaluate the effects of design parameters including surface area, distance between and geometry of dry flexible electrodes on electrodermal activity (EDA) stimulus response detection. Methods: EDA is a result of the autonomic nervous system being stimulated, which causes sweat and changes the electrical characteristics of the skin. Standard silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl) EDA electrodes are rigid and lack conformability in contact with skin. In this study, flexible dry Ag/AgCl EDA electrodes were fabricated on a compliant substrate, used to monitor EDA stimulus responses and compared to results simultaneously collected by rigid dry Ag/AgCl electrodes. Results: A repeatable fabrication process for flexible Ag/AgCl electrodes has been established. Surface area, distance between and geometry of electrodes are shown to affect the detectability of the EDA response and the minimum number of sweat glands to be covered by the electrodes has been estimated at 140, or more, in order to maintain functionality. The optimal flexible EDA electrode is a serpentine design with a 0.15 cm2surface area and a 0.20 cm distance with an average Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.979 ± 0.015. Conclusion: Fabrication of flexible electrodes is described and an understanding of the effects of electrode designs on the EDA stimulus response detection has been established and is potentially related to the coverage of sweat glands. Significance: This work presents a novel systematic approach to understand the effects of electrode designs on monitoring EDA which is of importance for the design of wearable EDA monitoring devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207