MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385614862 · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2023.112227

An EIT-based piezoresistive sensing skin with a lattice structure

2023· article· en· W4385614862 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials & Design · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsMaterials sciencePiezoresistive effectElectronic skinElectrical resistance and conductanceComposite numberLattice (music)Wearable computerPlanarAcousticsTactile sensorOptoelectronicsComposite materialBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatially distributed sensing has gained significant value in diverse domains, with wearables as a notable application. In this work, a flexible skin-like sensor was developed for distributed pressure sensing. The sensing skin comprised a carbon black/silicone composite lattice structure embedded in a silicone sheet. The lattice-patterned structure is a distinct departure from conventional uniform sensing skins. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) was employed to reconstruct electrical resistance over the sensing area, which was then mapped into pressure distribution based on the principle of piezoresistivity. EIT offers continuity and design simplicity as it eliminates the need for internal wiring, making it a promising technique in the wearable industry. The lattice sensing skin offered favorable sensing attributes, including quick response and recovery (75 ms and 84 ms at 85 kPa), a linear response with sensitivity as high as 0.119 kPa−1, a full-scale range of at least 100 kPa, and high repeatability (∼0.5% drop in maximum relative resistance over 300 cycles). The sensing skin was responsive over its entire area in both flat and non-planar conditions and was able to detect both single- and multi-point touch. The sensitivity and tactile area detectability varied depending on the position of applied pressure over the sensing area. Future studies will examine other lattice patterns and conductive composite fillers with the intention to develop a framework for optimizing the lattice sensing skin for tailored accuracy and resolution.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · 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