3D printed leech-inspired origami dry electrodes for electrophysiology sensing robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, based on inspiration drawn from origami and the suction mechanism of leeches, a dry electrode is developed for reliable blood pressure (BP) monitoring. The leech-inspired suction mechanism generated a local soft vacuum facilitating appropriate contact with the human skin. Subsequently, an electrocardiogram (ECG) sensor, termed a leech-inspired origami (LIO) sensor, was constructed using the developed dry electrode. The LIO with a sensing robot system ensures reliable ECG signals with a signal-to-noise ratio of 21.7 ± 0.56 dB. From the paired detection of ECG and photoplethysmography (PPG) through human–robot interaction, BP monitoring was demonstrated. The average difference of the systolic BP between that estimated by the sensing robot and that monitored by the sphygmomanometer was 0.03 mmHg, indicating the reliable BP monitoring ability of the sensing robot. The LIO sensing system inspired by origami and leech behaviors makes BP sensing tools feasible, which in turn would further the development of a remote healthcare monitoring robotic system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".