MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965987891 · doi:10.11159/icbes19.112

Somatosensory Electrical Stimulator for Assessment of Current Perception Threshold at Different Frequencies

2019· article· en· W2965987891 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William Azevedo de Paula, Laisla Vieira de Almeida, Emerson Fachin‐Martins, Renato Zanetti, Henrique Resende Martins

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito FederalCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)PerceptionSomatosensory evoked potentialSomatosensory systemAudiologyComputer scienceElectrical engineeringNeurosciencePsychologyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aim to introduce the EELS device, an advantageous somatosensory electrical stimulator composed by hardware, firmware, and software to perform peripheral afferent fibers assessment based on sinusoidal current. We designed the EELS combining the precision given by STM32 microcontroller and the stability generated by the current source based on a bootstrap topology, a simplified and stable system if compared to a first equipment version. We coded the software as an Android Mobile Application (App) to have compatibility with mobile devices and reduce hardware set up time. Workbench tests shows EELS system operation capabilities in terms of Total Harmonic Distortion (THD), stimulus linearity, stimuli's frequency spectrum, and maximum current amplitude. The tests' results show an reduction in linearity when compared to the previous device, but the second order coefficient remains 10,000 times less than the first order coefficient. The bootstrap topology allows for a higher stimuli bandwidth up to 10,000 Hz, and the a higher current intensity (11.2 mA at maximum). Additionally, the App was stable during all tests and considered by us as intuitive and user friendly. Considering all improvements, EELS could outperform its predecessor, presenting a more intuitive and simple operation to break new grounds on research and clinical applications.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207