MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282934041 · doi:10.1039/d2tb00618a

Design of hydrogel-based wearable EEG electrodes for medical applications

2022· review· en· W4282934041 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

VenueJournal of Materials Chemistry B · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsWearable computerElectrodeMaterials scienceWearable technologyElectroencephalographyBiomedical engineeringNanotechnologyComputer scienceEmbedded systemEngineeringNeurosciencePsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electroencephalogram (EEG) is considered to be a promising method for studying brain disorders. Because of its non-invasive nature, subjects take a lower risk compared to some other invasive methods, while the systems record the brain signal. With the technological advancement of neural and material engineering, we are in the process of achieving continuous monitoring of neural activity through wearable EEG. In this article, we first give a brief introduction to EEG bands, circuits, wired/wireless EEG systems, and analysis algorithms. Then, we review the most recent advances in the interfaces used for EEG recordings, focusing on hydrogel-based EEG electrodes. Specifically, the advances for important figures of merit for EEG electrodes are reviewed. Finally, we summarize the potential medical application of wearable EEG systems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.275 · 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