Eddy Current Damping of Magnetically Actuated Neurosurgical Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flexion based magnetically actuated minimally invasive neurosurgical tools tend to oscillate for an extended period of time due to the lack of avenues for energy dissipation. This study proposes eddy current damping as the mechanism for reducing the vibrations present for such magnetic tools. After determining the necessary damping coefficient (4.31 × 10−9Ns m−1for a settling time less than 0.5 s and 2.01 × 10−6Ns m−1for critical damping), a feasibility study was conducted by approximating the potential damping that could be generated. An experimental study was performed to validate these values and relationships determined by the approximations by measuring the oscillation of a 2 mm by 2 mm by 4 mm N52 Neodymium magnet attached to a nitinol beam. Six measurements were taken at gap sizes between the magnet and conductor of 0 µm, 100 µm, 200 µm, 300 µm, 400 µm, 500 µm, 750 µm, 1000 µm, 1500 µm, and 2000 µm with copper conductors of thicknesses 0.127 mm to 0.635 mm in 0.127 mm increments. It was shown that sufficient damping could be generated experimentally (the maximum damping documented is 1.24 × 10−6Ns m−1).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".