MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021551732 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2020.2990587

Extracting Optimized Bio-Impedance Model Parameters Using Different Topologies of Oscillators

2020· article· en· W3021551732 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSensor Technology and Measurement Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScience and Technology Development Fund
KeywordsRelaxation oscillatorElectrical impedanceDispersion (optics)Relaxation (psychology)Nonlinear systemBiological systemSet (abstract data type)MathematicsNetwork topologyWork (physics)Topology (electrical circuits)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper demonstrates the possibility of extracting the single-dispersion and double-dispersion Cole-bio-impedance model parameters using oscillators (sinusoidal or relaxation). The method is based on replacing selected components in the oscillator structure with the biological sample under test and then using the Flower Pollination optimization Algorithm (FPA) to solve a set of nonlinear equations in order to extract the unknown model parameters. Minimum component sinusoidal oscillators and relaxation oscillators are used in this work and experimental results on three samples of four different fruits (Apple, Guava, Eggplant, and Tomato) are reported and compared with results obtained from a precise research-grade BioLogic SP150 electrochemical station.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.175 · 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