MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117058866 · doi:10.3390/s21010225

Inductive Textile Sensor Design and Validation for a Wearable Monitoring Device

2021· article· en· W3117058866 on OpenAlexafffund
Astrid García Patiño, Carlo Menon

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsInductive sensorWearable computerTextileInductanceResistive touchscreenInduction loopReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Electronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringEmbedded systemVoltageMaterials sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Textile sensors have gained attention for wearable devices, in which the most popular are the resistive textile sensor. However, these sensors present high hysteresis and a drift when stretched for long periods of time. Inductive textile sensors have been commonly used as antennas and plethysmographs, and their applications have been extended to measure heartbeat, wireless data transmission, and motion and gesture capturing systems. Inductive textile sensors have shown high reliability, stable readings, low production cost, and an easy manufacturing process. This paper presents the design and validation of an inductive strain textile sensor. The anthropometric dimensions of a healthy participant were used to define the maximum dimensions of the inductive textile sensor. The design of the inductive sensor was studied through theoretical calculations and simulations. Parameters such as height, width, area, perimeter, and number of complete loops were considered to calculate and evaluate the inductance value.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207